RE: Tomcat 4.1.x Clustering
Just had a look at it. Not tried it yet, but have a query. Why haven't you used JavaGroups for this? Dave. -Original Message- From: Filip Hanik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 09 March 2003 23:23 To: Tomcat Developers List Subject: Tomcat 4.1.x Clustering okey dokey, a pre taste of what tomcat 5 is going to include, a fully working version of clustering for your Tomcat 4.1.x codebase. I wrote this against 4.1.12, but intend to test it with later versions as well. Let me know if you beat me to it. http://www.filip.net/tomcat-clustering.html Tomcat 5, will ship with clustering, or at least a module with clustering :) Filip ~ Namaste - I bow to the divine in you ~ Filip Hanik Software Architect www.filip.net - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ Namaste - I bow to the divine in you ~ Filip Hanik Software Architect www.filip.net -Original Message- From: Remy Maucherat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2003 9:33 AM To: Tomcat Developers List Subject: Re: cvs commit: jakarta-tomcat-connectors/coyote/src/java/org/apache/coyote/tomcat5 MapperListener.java Costin Manolache wrote: Remy Maucherat wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: costin 2003/03/07 22:52:36 Modified:coyote/src/java/org/apache/coyote/tomcat5 MapperListener.java Log: A Server is not required for non-standalone operation. In fact, Embeded doesn't define a server, and most apps embeding tomcat use this approach. All we care is an Engine. Hmm, yes. Well, actually, no. In that junk code (I should have put a fixme), I'm trying to look up the hosts. I was planning to rewrite the code using JMX and remove the coupling (the only good solution IMO). What do you think ? It's even better. But you can just look for contexts - using the j2eeType=WebModule to do the query ( but you'll have to parse the host and path from the name - the spec doesn't define a host attribute ). What I think is that we should clean up a bit before 5.0 is final - we have Embeded which doesn't extend or use Service or Server, and is probably used either directly or as a model by people. Engine is the only stable point ( which makes sense ), we should deprecate and make sure we don't depend too much on Service or Server ( except the standalone case ), otherwise some features will not work very well if tomcat is embeded in some other app. And we should clean up the naming conventions ASAP. We don't need 5 names ( server name, service name, engine name, jvmroute and JMX domain ) - all we need is a Servlet Engine ID - common to all of them. That sounds reasonable. 4 unique IDs seems overkill. Remy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit: http://www.star.net.uk This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit: http://www.star.net.uk
RE: Tomcat 4.1.x Clustering
incompatible licenses Filip ~ Namaste - I bow to the divine in you ~ Filip Hanik Software Architect www.filip.net -Original Message- From: Oxley, David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 2:53 AM To: 'Tomcat Developers List' Subject: RE: Tomcat 4.1.x Clustering Just had a look at it. Not tried it yet, but have a query. Why haven't you used JavaGroups for this? Dave. -Original Message- From: Filip Hanik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 09 March 2003 23:23 To: Tomcat Developers List Subject: Tomcat 4.1.x Clustering okey dokey, a pre taste of what tomcat 5 is going to include, a fully working version of clustering for your Tomcat 4.1.x codebase. I wrote this against 4.1.12, but intend to test it with later versions as well. Let me know if you beat me to it. http://www.filip.net/tomcat-clustering.html Tomcat 5, will ship with clustering, or at least a module with clustering :) Filip ~ Namaste - I bow to the divine in you ~ Filip Hanik Software Architect www.filip.net - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ Namaste - I bow to the divine in you ~ Filip Hanik Software Architect www.filip.net -Original Message- From: Remy Maucherat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2003 9:33 AM To: Tomcat Developers List Subject: Re: cvs commit: jakarta-tomcat-connectors/coyote/src/java/org/apache/coyote/tomcat5 MapperListener.java Costin Manolache wrote: Remy Maucherat wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: costin 2003/03/07 22:52:36 Modified:coyote/src/java/org/apache/coyote/tomcat5 MapperListener.java Log: A Server is not required for non-standalone operation. In fact, Embeded doesn't define a server, and most apps embeding tomcat use this approach. All we care is an Engine. Hmm, yes. Well, actually, no. In that junk code (I should have put a fixme), I'm trying to look up the hosts. I was planning to rewrite the code using JMX and remove the coupling (the only good solution IMO). What do you think ? It's even better. But you can just look for contexts - using the j2eeType=WebModule to do the query ( but you'll have to parse the host and path from the name - the spec doesn't define a host attribute ). What I think is that we should clean up a bit before 5.0 is final - we have Embeded which doesn't extend or use Service or Server, and is probably used either directly or as a model by people. Engine is the only stable point ( which makes sense ), we should deprecate and make sure we don't depend too much on Service or Server ( except the standalone case ), otherwise some features will not work very well if tomcat is embeded in some other app. And we should clean up the naming conventions ASAP. We don't need 5 names ( server name, service name, engine name, jvmroute and JMX domain ) - all we need is a Servlet Engine ID - common to all of them. That sounds reasonable. 4 unique IDs seems overkill. Remy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit: http://www.star.net.uk This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit: http://www.star.net.uk - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Tomcat 4.1.x Clustering
How is LGPL incompatible? I can understand GPL. Dave. -Original Message- From: Filip Hanik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10 March 2003 17:45 To: Tomcat Developers List Subject: RE: Tomcat 4.1.x Clustering incompatible licenses Filip ~ Namaste - I bow to the divine in you ~ Filip Hanik Software Architect www.filip.net -Original Message- From: Oxley, David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 2:53 AM To: 'Tomcat Developers List' Subject: RE: Tomcat 4.1.x Clustering Just had a look at it. Not tried it yet, but have a query. Why haven't you used JavaGroups for this? Dave. -Original Message- From: Filip Hanik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 09 March 2003 23:23 To: Tomcat Developers List Subject: Tomcat 4.1.x Clustering okey dokey, a pre taste of what tomcat 5 is going to include, a fully working version of clustering for your Tomcat 4.1.x codebase. I wrote this against 4.1.12, but intend to test it with later versions as well. Let me know if you beat me to it. http://www.filip.net/tomcat-clustering.html Tomcat 5, will ship with clustering, or at least a module with clustering :) Filip ~ Namaste - I bow to the divine in you ~ Filip Hanik Software Architect www.filip.net - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ Namaste - I bow to the divine in you ~ Filip Hanik Software Architect www.filip.net -Original Message- From: Remy Maucherat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2003 9:33 AM To: Tomcat Developers List Subject: Re: cvs commit: jakarta-tomcat-connectors/coyote/src/java/org/apache/coyote/tomcat5 MapperListener.java Costin Manolache wrote: Remy Maucherat wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: costin 2003/03/07 22:52:36 Modified:coyote/src/java/org/apache/coyote/tomcat5 MapperListener.java Log: A Server is not required for non-standalone operation. In fact, Embeded doesn't define a server, and most apps embeding tomcat use this approach. All we care is an Engine. Hmm, yes. Well, actually, no. In that junk code (I should have put a fixme), I'm trying to look up the hosts. I was planning to rewrite the code using JMX and remove the coupling (the only good solution IMO). What do you think ? It's even better. But you can just look for contexts - using the j2eeType=WebModule to do the query ( but you'll have to parse the host and path from the name - the spec doesn't define a host attribute ). What I think is that we should clean up a bit before 5.0 is final - we have Embeded which doesn't extend or use Service or Server, and is probably used either directly or as a model by people. Engine is the only stable point ( which makes sense ), we should deprecate and make sure we don't depend too much on Service or Server ( except the standalone case ), otherwise some features will not work very well if tomcat is embeded in some other app. And we should clean up the naming conventions ASAP. We don't need 5 names ( server name, service name, engine name, jvmroute and JMX domain ) - all we need is a Servlet Engine ID - common to all of them. That sounds reasonable. 4 unique IDs seems overkill. Remy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit: http://www.star.net.uk This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit: http://www.star.net.uk - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The service
RE: Tomcat 4.1.x Clustering
uuhh, it's been a long debate, not sure if it's archived somewhere, and it wasn't my decision. Filip ~ Namaste - I bow to the divine in you ~ Filip Hanik Software Architect www.filip.net -Original Message- From: Oxley, David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 9:49 AM To: 'Tomcat Developers List' Subject: RE: Tomcat 4.1.x Clustering How is LGPL incompatible? I can understand GPL. Dave. -Original Message- From: Filip Hanik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10 March 2003 17:45 To: Tomcat Developers List Subject: RE: Tomcat 4.1.x Clustering incompatible licenses Filip ~ Namaste - I bow to the divine in you ~ Filip Hanik Software Architect www.filip.net -Original Message- From: Oxley, David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 2:53 AM To: 'Tomcat Developers List' Subject: RE: Tomcat 4.1.x Clustering Just had a look at it. Not tried it yet, but have a query. Why haven't you used JavaGroups for this? Dave. -Original Message- From: Filip Hanik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 09 March 2003 23:23 To: Tomcat Developers List Subject: Tomcat 4.1.x Clustering okey dokey, a pre taste of what tomcat 5 is going to include, a fully working version of clustering for your Tomcat 4.1.x codebase. I wrote this against 4.1.12, but intend to test it with later versions as well. Let me know if you beat me to it. http://www.filip.net/tomcat-clustering.html Tomcat 5, will ship with clustering, or at least a module with clustering :) Filip ~ Namaste - I bow to the divine in you ~ Filip Hanik Software Architect www.filip.net - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ Namaste - I bow to the divine in you ~ Filip Hanik Software Architect www.filip.net -Original Message- From: Remy Maucherat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2003 9:33 AM To: Tomcat Developers List Subject: Re: cvs commit: jakarta-tomcat-connectors/coyote/src/java/org/apache/coyote/tomcat5 MapperListener.java Costin Manolache wrote: Remy Maucherat wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: costin 2003/03/07 22:52:36 Modified:coyote/src/java/org/apache/coyote/tomcat5 MapperListener.java Log: A Server is not required for non-standalone operation. In fact, Embeded doesn't define a server, and most apps embeding tomcat use this approach. All we care is an Engine. Hmm, yes. Well, actually, no. In that junk code (I should have put a fixme), I'm trying to look up the hosts. I was planning to rewrite the code using JMX and remove the coupling (the only good solution IMO). What do you think ? It's even better. But you can just look for contexts - using the j2eeType=WebModule to do the query ( but you'll have to parse the host and path from the name - the spec doesn't define a host attribute ). What I think is that we should clean up a bit before 5.0 is final - we have Embeded which doesn't extend or use Service or Server, and is probably used either directly or as a model by people. Engine is the only stable point ( which makes sense ), we should deprecate and make sure we don't depend too much on Service or Server ( except the standalone case ), otherwise some features will not work very well if tomcat is embeded in some other app. And we should clean up the naming conventions ASAP. We don't need 5 names ( server name, service name, engine name, jvmroute and JMX domain ) - all we need is a Servlet Engine ID - common to all of them. That sounds reasonable. 4 unique IDs seems overkill. Remy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit: http://www.star.net.uk This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit: http://www.star.net.uk
