Re: Jetty Max Threads Patch

2005-07-27 Thread Jeff Genender
started Tomcat.  But this became unfeasible when I  
noticed the whole Tomcat architecture revolved around pluggable  
components that introspect the component properties.  No one single  
Valve or Realm fit ... they seemed to have different properties based  
upon the class used.  Introspection was the cure.  Now we can use any  
kind of connector/Valve/Realm/Host/Engine by declaring the class name  
and setting initParams...Gbean will introspect...and it works.


What I would suggest perhaps is to look at this from a bigger picture  
and review the way Gbeans work with attributes, and would there be a  
way to allow for dynamic parameters w/o the need to explicitly code  
the attributes.  Some form of introspection would be ideal (as I am  
currently using in the Tomcat Gbeans).  This way we can make 
pluggable  pojo classes that allow for dynamically configurable 
properties.  Perhaps the Spring kernel will allow this?


Jeff


On Wed, 27 Jul 2005, Matt Hogstrom wrote:


I was going to do that tonight or tomorrow and give Tomcat the  
same lovin.


Matt


- Original Message - From: "Aaron Mulder"  
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 8:44 PM
Subject: Jetty Max Threads Patch





Matt,
If you're up to it, can you submit an additional patch for the
Jetty connectors to fully implement




modules/j2ee/src/java/org/apache/geronimo/j2ee/management/ 
geronimo/WebConnec

tor.java



I've verified that the underlying product supports all the methods
in there (I put the URLs in the JavaDoc).  There's also a
SecureConnector.java interface in the same dir for the SSL  
connector.


Thanks,
Aaron













Re: Jetty Max Threads Patch

2005-07-27 Thread David Jencks
This way we can make pluggable  
pojo classes that allow for dynamically configurable properties.  
Perhaps the Spring kernel will allow this?


Jeff


On Wed, 27 Jul 2005, Matt Hogstrom wrote:


I was going to do that tonight or tomorrow and give Tomcat the  
same lovin.


Matt


- Original Message - From: "Aaron Mulder"  
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 8:44 PM
Subject: Jetty Max Threads Patch





Matt,
If you're up to it, can you submit an additional patch for the
Jetty connectors to fully implement




modules/j2ee/src/java/org/apache/geronimo/j2ee/management/ 
geronimo/WebConnec

tor.java



I've verified that the underlying product supports all the methods
in there (I put the URLs in the JavaDoc).  There's also a
SecureConnector.java interface in the same dir for the SSL  
connector.


Thanks,
Aaron















Re: Jetty Max Threads Patch

2005-07-27 Thread Jeff Genender



Aaron Mulder wrote:

On Wed, 27 Jul 2005, Jeff Genender wrote:

For subclassing to make an SSL Gbean, I am against this...this nails up 
a particular connector GBean, where what I have allows the connector to 
be used for just that...a connector...any protocol, etc, makes no 
difference here.  The Connector architecture I have implemented allows 
for a direct pass through to Tomcat's Connector object, and thus makes 
it as flexible as possible.



Here's the problem: if ConnectorGBean offers SSL settings, you're
offered the opportunity to provide/configure a bunch of stuff that is
totally irrelevant to a non-SSL connector (you know, user views an HTTP
connector, it asks them for a keystore -- what's up with that?).  I don't
believe we should offer configuration and management setting that don't
apply.

So, I'd prefer to do this:

ConnectorGBean
 - all connector code
 - non-SSL config options

SSLConnectorGBean extends ConnectorGBean
 - no additional connector code (config/mgmt only)
 - always sets secure=true
 - includes SSL config options (inherits non-SSL config options)
 - ultimately can refer to an external keystore GBean


What about AJP?  I guess its fine to subclass as long as the 
ConnectorGBean is available, so other types of connectors could be created.




	That wat if you go to manage a HTTP connector, it has only 
settings pertinent to an HTTP connector, and if you go to manage an HTTPS 
connector is has all the settings pertinent to an HTTPS connector.


	Again, I'm not at all suggesting that we split up the code that 
deals with the underlying Tomcat objects.


Good...this was really my main concern.




If this is something you want to occur, then I would appreciate that 
this is opened up for discussion before anyone goes subclassing the 
ConnectorGBean.



	Sorry -- I thought I wrote to the list about this aready, but it 
was stuck in my postponed messages.  Here was my original thought on the 
topic.


Now things make sense ;-)  But I am addressing one area ... comments 
inline below.




Aaron

---

So as part of this management API, I'd like to move a bunch of
properties out of the "initParams" and into separate properties for the
Tomcat connectors.  Then those properties can be reflected in the
management interface.

One issue is that all connectors seem to support the same settings
-- in particular, the SSL settings, which I guess are just ignored unless
the secure flag is set.  But it doesn't make sense to me to offer SSL
management properties for HTTP connectors.

That being the case, I'd like to break out an SSLConnectorGBean
from the ConnectorGBean.  The SSL version would just extend the basic
one, add more manageable properties, and default the secure flag to true.

For now, you could still configure a SSL connector using the
standard ConectorGBean just to frustrate me, but eventually I'd like to
move all the connector properties into GBean properties and remove the
initParams all together.


That will be a problem in the future.  The whole idea about the 
initParams is it allows you to plug in other "beans" and the GBean will 
dynamically set the properties through introspection without having to 
write a GBean that nails up an attribute to a class property.  I think 
its ok to do this with SSL, etc, but an accross the board cut of the 
initparams would force us to write a new GBean if I have a new connector 
object (or new Valve or Realm or Host).


I originally was doing a one for one Gbean attribute to class parameter 
when I started Tomcat.  But this became unfeasible when I noticed the 
whole Tomcat architecture revolved around pluggable components that 
introspect the component properties.  No one single Valve or Realm fit 
... they seemed to have different properties based upon the class used. 
 Introspection was the cure.  Now we can use any kind of 
connector/Valve/Realm/Host/Engine by declaring the class name and 
setting initParams...Gbean will introspect...and it works.


What I would suggest perhaps is to look at this from a bigger picture 
and review the way Gbeans work with attributes, and would there be a way 
to allow for dynamic parameters w/o the need to explicitly code the 
attributes.  Some form of introspection would be ideal (as I am 
currently using in the Tomcat Gbeans).  This way we can make pluggable 
pojo classes that allow for dynamically configurable properties. 
Perhaps the Spring kernel will allow this?


Jeff







On Wed, 27 Jul 2005, Matt Hogstrom wrote:



I was going to do that tonight or tomorrow and give Tomcat the same lovin.

Matt


- Original Message - 
From: "Aaron Mulder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 8:44 PM
Subject: Jetty Max Threads Patch





Matt,
If you're up to it, can you submit an additional patch for the
Jetty connector

Re: Jetty Max Threads Patch

2005-07-27 Thread Aaron Mulder
On Wed, 27 Jul 2005, Jeff Genender wrote:
> For subclassing to make an SSL Gbean, I am against this...this nails up 
> a particular connector GBean, where what I have allows the connector to 
> be used for just that...a connector...any protocol, etc, makes no 
> difference here.  The Connector architecture I have implemented allows 
> for a direct pass through to Tomcat's Connector object, and thus makes 
> it as flexible as possible.

Here's the problem: if ConnectorGBean offers SSL settings, you're
offered the opportunity to provide/configure a bunch of stuff that is
totally irrelevant to a non-SSL connector (you know, user views an HTTP
connector, it asks them for a keystore -- what's up with that?).  I don't
believe we should offer configuration and management setting that don't
apply.

So, I'd prefer to do this:

ConnectorGBean
 - all connector code
 - non-SSL config options

SSLConnectorGBean extends ConnectorGBean
 - no additional connector code (config/mgmt only)
 - always sets secure=true
 - includes SSL config options (inherits non-SSL config options)
 - ultimately can refer to an external keystore GBean

That wat if you go to manage a HTTP connector, it has only 
settings pertinent to an HTTP connector, and if you go to manage an HTTPS 
connector is has all the settings pertinent to an HTTPS connector.

Again, I'm not at all suggesting that we split up the code that 
deals with the underlying Tomcat objects.

> If this is something you want to occur, then I would appreciate that 
> this is opened up for discussion before anyone goes subclassing the 
> ConnectorGBean.

Sorry -- I thought I wrote to the list about this aready, but it 
was stuck in my postponed messages.  Here was my original thought on the 
topic.

Aaron

---

So as part of this management API, I'd like to move a bunch of
properties out of the "initParams" and into separate properties for the
Tomcat connectors.  Then those properties can be reflected in the
management interface.

One issue is that all connectors seem to support the same settings
-- in particular, the SSL settings, which I guess are just ignored unless
the secure flag is set.  But it doesn't make sense to me to offer SSL
management properties for HTTP connectors.

That being the case, I'd like to break out an SSLConnectorGBean
from the ConnectorGBean.  The SSL version would just extend the basic
one, add more manageable properties, and default the secure flag to true.

For now, you could still configure a SSL connector using the
standard ConectorGBean just to frustrate me, but eventually I'd like to
move all the connector properties into GBean properties and remove the
initParams all together.



> > On Wed, 27 Jul 2005, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> > 
> >>I was going to do that tonight or tomorrow and give Tomcat the same lovin.
> >>
> >>Matt
> >>
> >>
> >>- Original Message - 
> >>From: "Aaron Mulder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>To: 
> >>Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 8:44 PM
> >>Subject: Jetty Max Threads Patch
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>Matt,
> >>>If you're up to it, can you submit an additional patch for the
> >>>Jetty connectors to fully implement
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>modules/j2ee/src/java/org/apache/geronimo/j2ee/management/geronimo/WebConnec
> >>tor.java
> >>
> >>>I've verified that the underlying product supports all the methods
> >>>in there (I put the URLs in the JavaDoc).  There's also a
> >>>SecureConnector.java interface in the same dir for the SSL connector.
> >>>
> >>>Thanks,
> >>>Aaron
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> 


Re: Jetty Max Threads Patch

2005-07-27 Thread Jeff Genender


Aaron Mulder wrote:
	Tomcat will be a little more complicated because we have to break 
everything out of the initProps, and create a subclass for the SSL 
connector GBean, but it does support all the stuff we need, so it's mostly 
a matter of re-arranging.



For subclassing to make an SSL Gbean, I am against this...this nails up 
a particular connector GBean, where what I have allows the connector to 
be used for just that...a connector...any protocol, etc, makes no 
difference here.  The Connector architecture I have implemented allows 
for a direct pass through to Tomcat's Connector object, and thus makes 
it as flexible as possible.


If this is something you want to occur, then I would appreciate that 
this is opened up for discussion before anyone goes subclassing the 
ConnectorGBean.




Thanks,
Aaron

On Wed, 27 Jul 2005, Matt Hogstrom wrote:


I was going to do that tonight or tomorrow and give Tomcat the same lovin.

Matt


- Original Message - 
From: "Aaron Mulder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 8:44 PM
Subject: Jetty Max Threads Patch




Matt,
If you're up to it, can you submit an additional patch for the
Jetty connectors to fully implement




modules/j2ee/src/java/org/apache/geronimo/j2ee/management/geronimo/WebConnec
tor.java


I've verified that the underlying product supports all the methods
in there (I put the URLs in the JavaDoc).  There's also a
SecureConnector.java interface in the same dir for the SSL connector.

Thanks,
Aaron











Re: Jetty Max Threads Patch

2005-07-27 Thread Aaron Mulder
Tomcat will be a little more complicated because we have to break 
everything out of the initProps, and create a subclass for the SSL 
connector GBean, but it does support all the stuff we need, so it's mostly 
a matter of re-arranging.

Thanks,
Aaron

On Wed, 27 Jul 2005, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> I was going to do that tonight or tomorrow and give Tomcat the same lovin.
> 
> Matt
> 
> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Aaron Mulder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 
> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 8:44 PM
> Subject: Jetty Max Threads Patch
> 
> 
> > Matt,
> > If you're up to it, can you submit an additional patch for the
> > Jetty connectors to fully implement
> >
> >
> modules/j2ee/src/java/org/apache/geronimo/j2ee/management/geronimo/WebConnec
> tor.java
> >
> > I've verified that the underlying product supports all the methods
> > in there (I put the URLs in the JavaDoc).  There's also a
> > SecureConnector.java interface in the same dir for the SSL connector.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Aaron
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 


Re: Jetty Max Threads Patch

2005-07-27 Thread Matt Hogstrom
I was going to do that tonight or tomorrow and give Tomcat the same lovin.

Matt


- Original Message - 
From: "Aaron Mulder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 8:44 PM
Subject: Jetty Max Threads Patch


> Matt,
> If you're up to it, can you submit an additional patch for the
> Jetty connectors to fully implement
>
>
modules/j2ee/src/java/org/apache/geronimo/j2ee/management/geronimo/WebConnec
tor.java
>
> I've verified that the underlying product supports all the methods
> in there (I put the URLs in the JavaDoc).  There's also a
> SecureConnector.java interface in the same dir for the SSL connector.
>
> Thanks,
> Aaron
>
>
>






Jetty Max Threads Patch

2005-07-27 Thread Aaron Mulder
Matt,
If you're up to it, can you submit an additional patch for the
Jetty connectors to fully implement

modules/j2ee/src/java/org/apache/geronimo/j2ee/management/geronimo/WebConnector.java

I've verified that the underlying product supports all the methods
in there (I put the URLs in the JavaDoc).  There's also a
SecureConnector.java interface in the same dir for the SSL connector.

Thanks,
Aaron