On Feb 8, 2008, at 1:02 AM, Daniel López wrote:
> Scott Ferguson escribió:
>> On Feb 7, 2008, at 9:27 AM, Daniel Lopez wrote:
>>> Would then be the recommended way to work to set all watchdog
>>> ports on
>>> all resin.conf files to be the same one? I'm thinking that might be
>>> causing some of the issues as "side effect".
>> It currently defaults to use the same one. I'm not sure I
> Ummm my bad, the port I'm configuring different for each instance is
> "server port":
> <server id="InstanceX" address="127.0.0.1" port="660X"/>
> I confused the concepts. That is probably the port used by the
> process to contact this server instance, so having it different on
> instance is the right way to go.
That's the cluster port for the Resin server. It's used for load-
balancing, distributed sessions, distributed management, etc. The
watchdog doesn't actually use that port at all.
> I understand now, thanks to Bill Au's reminder, that in order to
> the watchdog port, there's another setting.
> However, that would probably mean 2 JMV instances per "server", right?
> One for the watchdog process and another for the app. server itself.
> That would probably be too much overhead, as having many perl
> was a not a problem before, but JVM processes are not that light :).
I should take a look to see if we can reduce the size of that
process. The watchdog itself isn't doing much (which is the whole
point of a watchdog process.)
> So I'll wait for the issues to be dealt with, and then stay with one
> watchdog process and several instances.
> Thanks all for your help,
> resin-interest mailing list
resin-interest mailing list