Bruce Snyder wrote:
GW>The webcontainer AND ALL ITS components are being added as first class GW>geronimo services. Thus connecters, webapps, request logs (and eventually GW>session managers, realms etc.) are all geronimo services with standard GW>geronimo lifecycles, management and configuration.
I wasn't aware of this feature set within Geronimo. Please elaborate on how this is being acheieved. I'm not looking for JBo$$ bashing, I'm simply looking for a down to earth description of the implmentation as well as why this is significant (i.e. what can be achieved with this level of integration?).
I wrote up a little bit about this initially on the wiki : http://wiki.codehaus.org/geronimo/Architecture/WebContainer
But I think that is already a little old and I need to update it.
Jan has done most of the work, so I'll let her give you the low down detail on this. But the short summary is that all the webcontainer components are being wrapped as JSR77 managed objects and are deployed, configured and managed as any other G service.
Currently the webcontainer Jan has checked in has all the components defined in the same jetty-service.xml file. But it is trivial to break out each subservice into it's own XXX-service.xml if you want to have multiple connectors or different deployment lifecycles.
GW>The web tier is a major component of an app server and it should not GW>be treated as a foreign subsystem simply because it is too much work GW>to re-implement. GW> GW>I think that is going to be a huge plus for Geronimo and allow GW>people to develop web-centric services (like HttpSesson distribution) GW>using geronimo's infrastructure without getting into jetty or tomcat GW>internals - well that's the idea anyway.
I'd really like to have a real world application of this functionality, possibly along the lines of what you describe above. I need to be able to explain and possbily discuss this stuff at ApacheCon (although I'm going to rely on other Geronimo developers who are attending to jump into the fray as needed ;-)).
I think distributed sessions is a good example - for which Jules is the best person to give you detail. But I'll summaries.
There are many issues to consider with distributed sessions and the bad specification means that we are unlikely to have a one-size-fits-all distributed session manager.
As it is, both tomcat and jetty have pluggable session manager and multiple implementations. These session managers commonly use some, a bit or a lot of the app server infrastructure (eg there are some written directly to javagroups, others to jboss services, and other to use EJBs). We are aiming to achieve pluggable session managers in geronimo that will provide similar (and other) implementations. We aim to be able to write these services without any dependancy on jetty and/or tomcat code.
cheers
/**************************************************************** * www.coredevelopers.net for Open Source training & support. * Training: J2EE Web/Cluster London Nov 10-13 * -- * Greg Wilkins * Partner * Core Developers Network ****************************************************************/
