AFAIK, we still have a desire to support multiple instances per Geronimo base install.
https://cwiki.apache.org/GMOxDOC30/running-multiple-geronimo-instances.html We have been working towards a common configuration location in 3.0 trunk for all parts of Geronimo. I am expecting to test and use multiple instances with the 3.0 release. -RG On 09/20/2011 10:08 PM, Rex Wang wrote: > If we want to continue maintain such complexity in 3.0? Hard drive is pretty > cheap nowadays. > > And I think currently the part that looks a little bit wasting space is karaf > "copy" the artifacts from repository to cache when start.. > > -Rex > > 2011/9/21 Forrest Xia <forres...@gmail.com <mailto:forres...@gmail.com>> > > This idea is like the multiple instances feature we had in 2.1 branch, but > not supported in trunk now. > > Geronimo 2.1.x support copying "var" folder to add more instances with a > same installation, but G trunk code does not support that feature now. > > Do we have a user scenario to mandate that feature for 3.x? > > Regards, > Forrest > > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 1:55 AM, Jarek Gawor <jga...@gmail.com > <mailto:jga...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Hi, > > In Geronimo binary install which directories do we consider read-only > vs. write/read? The idea is that the read-only directories could be > shared among multiple installations to save some space and reduce > maintenance. > > Here's what I identified so far: > > read-only: > - bin > - jsr88 > - schema > - lib > > read/write: > - deploy > - hotbundles > - etc > - var > > The repository/ directory is a little weird because parts of it could > be considered read-only and some write. I wonder if maybe we should > have separate repository directories one for Geronimo bundles and > another one for applications. > > Thanks, > Jarek > > > > > > -- > Lei Wang (Rex) > rwonly AT apache.org <http://apache.org>
