--On Tuesday, October 31, 2006 2:45 PM -0500 "(Cedric) Qin ZHANG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Hi, Philip,
I don't like our current build approach by copying everything to
tomcat/webapps/hackystat. I like the old hot deployment approach. The
hackyDevSite is
using the old hot deployment approach every night and there is no problem
what-so-ever.
That seems strange to me. How could hackydevsite be using a different deployment
strategy than the rest of us? It calls freshStart, which does the 'new' cold deploy.
So, I think it's more accurate to say that hackyDevSite is using the new cold deployment
approach every night and there is no problem what-so-over.
I cannot recall exactly what prompted us to switch to the "copying" approach.
Anyway, I
don't like to copy hundreds of thousands of files every time I call
"quickStart". If
you don't mind, I'd like to spend some time investigating this issue and take
us back
to the hot deployment approach.
Well, I just did a quickStart with a 14 module configuration and it copied 1,336 files,
which took my system approximately 3 seconds to accomplish. The total quickStart was 26
seconds. So, I'm not experiencing the same thing that you are.
On the other hand, if you would like to investigate this issue, that's totally fine with
me. I suggest you make a new file, called maybe something like
superquickstart.build.xml, in which you put a new set of targets that implement a hot
deploy strategy. We can all try it out and see what the pros and cons are, and it won't
affect the current approach at all.
Some history: The reason that we moved to the cold deploy was that the hot deploy would
create problems requiring a reinstall of Tomcat quite regularly. We have not experienced
that problem with the current approach. In addition, the hot deploy required the
installer of a binary distribution to re-run the soapDeploy target each time the system
was restarted. It turns out that this problem has also gone away with our new approach.
Of course, lots of things have been changing lately, so it might be possible that a hot
deploy approach could work. But I don't want to disable our current one right away
because it took a lot of pain and suffering to get there.
Cheers,
Philip
