Are you suggesting that at some future milestone, Tomcat would no longer be
configurable with a GBean deployment?
Is it being considered that in regards to newer versions of Tomcat, the GBean
may not be updated to incorporate newly introduced tomcat parameters?
That would suggest that GBean configuration for Geronimo's Tomcat will become
deprecated.
How would it be suggested that in this case Geronimo's Tomcat could be centrally
managed? Do we go back to pushing configuration files? That would change how
plugin based farms are managed.
-RG
On 02/29/2012 08:56 AM, Ivan wrote:
Yes, I agree that all the options should be documented, as you mentioned, we
need it in many places.
For the server.xml, I am thinking that it should be the main direction for the
tomcat container configuration in the future, IMHO.
As in the past versions, we find that those wrapper GBeans become more and more
complicated for. e.g. with the new Tomcat version,some new parameters are
introduced, and it is required to add those attributes for existing GBeans. From
another side, it is really not user-friendly to configure those things with
GBean. e.g. While configuring cluster, users may need to add a long GBean
configurations in the config.xml, which is error proven.
2012/2/29 Russell E Glaue <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
Do you think that var/catalina/server.xml should be the primary emphasis for
managing the default web container?
I think all options should be documented, but that one can be first.
Geronimo can run multiple web containers, but those have to be configured
via a GBean. So the virtual hosts would be configured similarly in these
environments.
And when Geronimo is in a Farming environment, GBean deployment will be the
requirement.
https://cwiki.apache.org/__GMOxDOC30/farming-using-__deployment.html
<https://cwiki.apache.org/GMOxDOC30/farming-using-deployment.html>
I believe a GBean option for all configurations should be documented when
possible. Then Geronimo can be configured remotely.
-RG
On 02/28/2012 07:28 PM, Ivan wrote:
Thanks for updating this, I am wondering whether we would encourage the
users to
use the server.xml to configure virtual host, although the gbean way
still works
now.
2012/2/29 Russell E Glaue <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>>
I am going to start working on this document for G3.0
https://cwiki.apache.org/____GMOxDOC30/configuring-virtual-____host-in-tomcat.html
<https://cwiki.apache.org/__GMOxDOC30/configuring-virtual-__host-in-tomcat.html>
<https://cwiki.apache.org/__GMOxDOC30/configuring-virtual-__host-in-tomcat.html
<https://cwiki.apache.org/GMOxDOC30/configuring-virtual-host-in-tomcat.html>>
In addition to updating what is there, I am going to add additional
information on how to deploy a plan with the deployer to configure
virtual
hosts.
Any comments/suggestions?
I will use this plan, which I have verified works.
-
<module xmlns="http://geronimo.apache.____org/xml/ns/deployment-1.2
<http://geronimo.apache.org/__xml/ns/deployment-1.2
<http://geronimo.apache.org/xml/ns/deployment-1.2>>">
<environment>
<moduleId>
<groupId>org.example.configs.____virtualhosts</groupId>
<artifactId>virtualhost1</____artifactId>
<version>1.0</version>
<type>car</type>
</moduleId>
<dependencies>
<dependency>
<groupId>org.apache.geronimo.____configs</groupId>
<artifactId>tomcat7</____artifactId>
<type>car</type>
</dependency>
</dependencies>
<hidden-classes/>
<non-overridable-classes/>
</environment>
<gbean name="TomcatVirtualHost_1"
class="org.apache.geronimo.____tomcat.HostGBean">
<attribute
name="className">org.apache.____catalina.core.StandardHost</____attribute>
<attribute name="initParams">name=virtual____host1.com
<http://virtual__host1.com> <http://virtualhost1.com>
appBase=
workDir=work</attribute>
<reference name="Engine">
<name>TomcatEngine</name>
</reference>
</gbean>
</module>
-
--
Ivan
--
Ivan
