Yes, that's the general idea. In your example the worker1 thread-pool would be in the serviceengine.xml file on server 1, and the worker2 thread-pool would be there on server 2.
-David On Dec 22, 2009, at 8:53 AM, Brett Palmer wrote: > I discovered some posting on this subject where users were setting up > different service "ThreadPools" to handle specific requests. Is this still > the preferred approach to assigning jobs to specific application servers? > > For Example we could configure our service engine to have a worker1 pool for > app server 1 and worker2 pool for app server 2: > > <thread-pool send-to-pool="worker1" > purge-job-days="4" > failed-retry-min="3" > ttl="18000000" > wait-millis="750" > jobs="10" > min-threads="5" > max-threads="15" > poll-enabled="true" > poll-db-millis="20000"> > <run-from-pool name="worker1"/> > </thread-pool> > > <thread-pool send-to-pool="worker2" > purge-job-days="4" > failed-retry-min="3" > ttl="18000000" > wait-millis="750" > jobs="10" > min-threads="5" > max-threads="15" > poll-enabled="true" > poll-db-millis="20000"> > <run-from-pool name="worker2"/> > </thread-pool> > > > Brett > > On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 7:30 AM, Brett Palmer <[email protected]>wrote: > >> We run multiple ofbiz application servers against the same ofbiz database. >> We would like to have specific application servers execute scheduled batch >> services through the JobSandbox. For example, server 1 executes service 1, >> server 2 executes service 2, etc. >> >> The default behavior is that each application server polls the JobSandbox >> for jobs that need to be serviced and the assignment of the job is >> completely random. >> >> Is there a way to assign jobs to servers and if so what is the recommended >> approach? >> >> >> Brett >>
