Hi Rohan Sorry I'm rather late coming to this thread. Been away for a few days. Anyhow, some comments inline..
Regards Simon On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 6:28 PM, Rohan Sahgal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For now, all I wanted to do, is rather than starting new > web-container's for every node, I wanted to have the service's running > in an existing container (on different machines). I already have > certain webapps running on these machines and I dont want to start > more than one web-container. I think you can do this now using the node webapp launcher. This is a bit of a strange beast in that you create a webapp that wraps up a node with sufficient information to configure itself and, when you drop the web app into your web container, it contacts the domain manager and pulls down the required configuration. Not to my liking really as there is a bit too much magic going on. I have to admit to not having tried webb app mode so we could look at extending the calculator-distributed sample to see if it works . There are maybe some other options here that I'm not aware of. Another alternative is to create a stand alone Tuscany/SCA webapp and deploy that to your container of choice and then configure the domain with the same composite information so that other components can wire to its component services. In this case there is not necessarily any configuration exchanged between the webapp and the domain. The domain just knows about services in the webapp in case anyone wants to wire to them. Not so good from the point of view of configuring any references that may be in the webb app. As you can see there is scope for some improvements in this area;-) > > However what would be really neat for Tuscany is (well in my opinion > anyways) if it was possible to do Service look-ups. > > What I mean by this is, say you have domain manager running on > Machine1, Node A running on Machine2, Node B running on Machine3 and > so on. Machine 1-3 are part of the same domain. > If a request comes to the domain manager for a service offered on In what form does the "request" arrive in this scenario? > > NodeA, it should be able to pass this request to Machine1 without > having proxy stubs on the Domain Manager machine. > ( If you consider the calculator example, the calculator service seems > to act like a proxy for AddService, SubtractService...) Yep, the calculator services is vending out requests to the Add/Subtract service etc. But the domain manager is not involved once the services are up and running on their respective nodes. > > > This can then be extended to dynamic service invocations. Say the > domain manager has the composite's for all the services, if Which it does at the moment. > > dynamically a node comes up that has the implementation for these > service definitions, and we have a registration process. Then requests > for these services can be passed on to the new node from the domain > manager. All this could theoretically happen at runtime. True. I think we have to consider the static domain we have at the moment a starting point which allows us to consider how to model a domain. If you ask the question at the moment about how to deal with cases where nodes that provide services are started and stoped in different locations then there are only really two answers. A) Make sure that any nodes that are being stopped/moved/started are running behind some kind of a virtualization layer such as an IP sprayed so from the static domain's point of view they are always in the same place in IP terms. B) Restart and nodes which have references that are affected by restarting nodes. I would be really useful to understand the scenarios that lead us to a more dynamic domain. > > > I guess that's a really far fetched vision. No, I don't think it's far fetched. > > > Thanks, > Rohan > > On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 10:49 AM, Luciano Resende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 10:43 AM, fahim salim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> Hello All > >> > >> One thing that would quite interesting is to have the possibility to > deploy > >> one domain (NodeA) in a web container (host1) and to deploy another > domain > >> (NodeB and NodeC) on another web container (host2) > >> > > > > Different Nodes can reside in different JVM, or in this case web > > containers, but still be part of the same domain. > > > > The Store Turotial demonstrates this, where you have your store > > running as a web 2.0 app in a embedded tomcat, and in one of the > > scenarios, you can have your catalog as a webapp deployed to another > > web container. > > > >> But I don't know if it's possible at the moment. > >> > >> Fahim > >> > >> 2008/10/24 ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 12:45 AM, Rohan Sahgal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Is it also possible to modify this sample to create WAR files so that > >>>> it can be run in any web container? > >>>> I see that now it starts a new Jetty container. > >>>> > >>>> I think that would be more helpful, since this way I can simply copy > >>>> the webapp to different machines rather than the entire Tuscany > >>>> distribution. > >>>> > >>>> If thats possible, I dont mind helping out to do this. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> Rohan > >>> > >>> Hi Rohan, I think this is an interesting idea, i'm not sure that it is > >>> possible with the current Tuscany code but that could be fixed, how > much > >>> work that is depends on how much function and flexibility you need. > There > >>> is some code and samples that use a webapp for a node in the > distributed > >>> domain, for example in the catalog-webapp in the tutorials\store > folder, but > >>> this is broken presently, if we fix the issues with it then it > shouldn't be > >>> that hard to get something like the distribted calculator sample > working in > >>> a similar way with webapp nodes. That would be all quite static which > may > >>> not be what you'd like and there are some issues with using webapps so > not > >>> sure whether or not this would do what you need, but there are also > other > >>> bits of code and discussion on going around this area so there is a lot > more > >>> we could do. Like Luciano asked, could you say a little more about the > sort > >>> of things you'd like to see? < br> > >>> ...ant > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Luciano Resende > > Apache Tuscany, Apache PhotArk > > http://people.apache.org/~lresende<http://people.apache.org/%7Elresende> > > http://lresende.blogspot.com/ > > >
