I think at current stage if it takes two days to switch things, then it
makes sense. We will not be able to do it later.

We will need to have a separate distribution for each supported platform.
And test each individually.

Sergi

2015-06-30 8:05 GMT-07:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <[email protected]>:

> Guys,
>
> I would like to avoid "let's drop everything and redo from scratch"
> discussions. I don't think they will productively get us there.
>
> The stack was chosen because it required zero code or integration on the
> server side and was easiest to implement. Let's try to answer how to make
> it downloadable in the easiest way.
>
> D.
>
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 7:52 AM, Sergi Vladykin <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Guys,
> >
> > To be honest I don't know why we choose this stack which is completely
> > alien to java when our main product is java based. I'm sure in the future
> > we will need better level of integration between them not only for Ignite
> > SQL schema import.
> >
> > Jetty it is a battle tested server, I think we can go ahead with it.
> > Moreover if we will not be satisfied we can replace it with something
> else
> > easily, while I don't know how we will replace node.js in a case.
> >
> > As for JSON Alexey, please describe what kind of operations we do with
> JSON
> > data and why we can't store it just as a String and be as DB neutral as
> > possible?
> >
> > Sergi
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 2015-06-30 7:31 GMT-07:00 Alexey Kuznetsov <[email protected]>:
> >
> > > Sergey,
> > >
> > > 1. How many connections Jetty + H2 could handle?
> > > Do you have any experience?
> > >
> > > 2. What is the best way to store JSON into db and later read JSON from
> > db?
> > >
> > > 3. Persistence feature could not be separated, because
> CacheTypeMetadata
> > is
> > > a part of CacheConfiguration.
> > >
> > > Dmitriy,
> > >  What do you think about dropping nodejs and mongoDB in favor of
> > jetty+h2 ?
> > >
> > > One more benefit of using java that we could reuse code from Ignite
> > Schema
> > > Import
> > >  for connecting to database (using JDBC) and reuse code that generates
> > XML
> > > and POJO classes.
> > >
> > > Also we could build and package Web Config with Maven I think.
> > >
> > > Actually we do not have much code at server side. So we could switch
> in a
> > > couple of days I think.
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 6:25 PM, Sergey Evdokimov <
> > [email protected]
> > > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I doubt that people will install docker to run WebConfig.
> > > >
> > > > If we expect running WebConfig on user machine node.js + mongoDB is a
> > bad
> > > > choose. Most of our users are java developers, the plain way is to
> use
> > > > Jetty + H2 and pack whole WebConfig to single jar. User will be start
> > it
> > > > using "java -jar webConfig.jar" without unnecessary actions.
> > > >
> > > > As I understand, only Persistence feature requires installation
> > WebConfig
> > > > on local machine, my be you should create separated project
> > > > PersistenceGenerator that will use Jetty+H2 and will be packed to
> > single
> > > > jar.
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Alexey Kuznetsov <
> > > [email protected]
> > > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > What about docker image?
> > > > > We will create docker image with installed nodejs, mongo and Ignite
> > Web
> > > > > Config.
> > > > > Will this solve this problem?
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> > > > [email protected]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > From my standpoint, I would like the web-config-download to come
> > as a
> > > > zip
> > > > > > file without any extra installation steps if possible.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ideally, a user should be able to just download it, unzip it, and
> > > start
> > > > > > using it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > D.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 12:33 AM, Alexey Kuznetsov <
> > > > > > [email protected]>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Igniters,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We are working on Ignite Web Config (ignite-843) and very close
> > to
> > > > > first
> > > > > > > version of it.
> > > > > > > As usual everything could be launched from sources, but for
> > > usability
> > > > > > issue
> > > > > > > I'm thinking
> > > > > > > about a kind of installer for web config.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In web config we are using: nodejs, mongodb, angular.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Does any one has experience of packaging web applications for
> > later
> > > > > > > deployment?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Any ideas are very appreciated.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Alexey Kuznetsov
> > > > > > > GridGain Systems
> > > > > > > www.gridgain.com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Alexey Kuznetsov
> > > > > GridGain Systems
> > > > > www.gridgain.com
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Alexey Kuznetsov
> > > GridGain Systems
> > > www.gridgain.com
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to