-
From: "Mike Finn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, June 24, 2002 10:42 AM
Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss in a multi developers
environment
> So you can undeploy jmx-html-adaptor.sar, and instead deploy this servlet
to
>
ooner
about this one
#mike
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Scott
M Stark
Sent: Monday, June 24, 2002 12:54 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss in a multi developers
environment
There is a replac
Scott Stark
Chief Technology Officer
JBoss Group, LLC
- Original Message -
From: "Mike Finn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, June 24, 2002 9:39 AM
Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss in a multi developers
e
PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Emerson Cargnin - MSA
Sent: Monday, June 24, 2002 9:55 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss in a multi developers
environment
Hi all, I've been posting about this subject a while ago, and we are
using multi instances of jboss/eclips
Hi all, I've been posting about this subject a while ago, and we are
using multi instances of jboss/eclipse and tomcat in the same machine
for use by developers remotely. We use the approache of a multi-homed
host, with more then one ip address.
At first we some of services out, changed the con
Hello Mike,
> If I understand your question correctly, yes (well, no to the 'dreaming'
> question :-) ). The 'default' list of ports would either be in the config
> file (like example below), or in each of the services' respective config
> files.
>
> I think this is what you mean (?). At config-t
nesday, June 12, 2002 11:58 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss in a multi developers
> environment
>
>
> Great. Submit it as a patch and we'll figure out where to put it in the
> source tree.
>
> As for JDOM, I thought we already
ate JDOM?
>
> #mike
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Dain
> Sundstrom
> Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 11:08 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss in a
gt;
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Dain
> Sundstrom
> Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 11:08 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss in a multi developers
> environm
incorporate JDOM?
#mike
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Dain
Sundstrom
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 11:08 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss in a multi developers
environment
Mike,
How are you
age- From:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of Scott M Stark Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 4:52 PM To:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev]
> Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss in a multi developers environment
>
>
>
>>> // The service JMX nam
.
Scott Stark
Chief Technology Officer
JBoss Group, LLC
- Original Message -
From: "Mike Finn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 6:18 AM
Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss in a multi develope
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss in a multi developers
environment
>
> > // The service JMX name
> > String jmxName;
> > // The virtualHost the service wants to bind to which may be null
> > String virtualHost;
> > // The name of the JBoss service
May 21, 2002 11:56 AM
>>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss in a multi developers
>>environment
>>
>>
>>Ok, and you will have that ready by?
>>
>>Scott Stark
>>Chief Technology Offi
Stark
> Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 11:56 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss in a multi developers
> environment
>
>
> Ok, and you will have that ready by?
>
> Scott Stark
> Chief Technology O
JBoss Group, LLC
- Original Message -
From: "Mike Finn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 5:01 AM
Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss in a multi developers
environment
>
> Very basic qu
ct: RE: [JBoss-dev] Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss in a multi developers
environment
> Guys,
>
> I've been thinking about this. Wouldn't it be better/easier to create a
UI
> configuration tool than do this port mapper stuff? What I mean is a JBoss
> configuration tool that for
Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Mike
> Finn
> Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 8:02 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss in a multi developers
> environment
>
>
>
> Very basic qu
ich to run...)?
#mike
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Juha-P Lindfors
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 6:36 AM
To: JBoss-dev
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss in a multi developers
environment
On Mon, 20 May 2002, Dain Sundstrom wr
;Dain Sundstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 8:57 PM
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss in a multi developers
environment
> What you want to bind to all addresses on the internal network (rl0)?
> It is not really important no
t; - Original Message -
> From: "Dain Sundstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 8:26 PM
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss in a multi developers
> environment
>
>
>
>>S
JBoss Group, LLC
- Original Message -
From: "Dain Sundstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 8:26 PM
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss in a multi developers
environment
> Scott, Jules,
&g
Scott, Jules,
Should this also include the interface name (String) for the new JDK 1.4
NetworkInterface binding stuff?
-dain
Scott M Stark wrote:
>>>// The service JMX name
>>>String jmxName;
>>>// The virtualHost the service wants to bind to which may be null
>>>String virtualHost;
>>>// T
Dain wrote:
> ServicePort contains a hostName, port, and InetAddress.
Doesn't InetAddress contain the hostName?
-Phil
___
Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference
August 25-28 in Las Vegas -- http://devcon.s
OK. It's easy enough to mod later. I'll go with last.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jason
Dillon
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 6:10 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Dain Sundstrom
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss
ndstrom
> > Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 3:17 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss in a multi developers
> > environment
> >
> >
> > Scott M Stark wrote:
> >
> >
> >>A port is not sufficient. T
AIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Dain
> Sundstrom
> Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 3:17 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss in a multi developers
> environment
>
>
> Scott M Stark wrote:
>
>
>>A port is not sufficient. This ne
Anatoly Akkerman wrote:
>>
>>...
>>starksm
>>
>>
>>while for your instance he adds:
>>
>>...
>>dsundstrom
>>
>>
>>Now there can be a static configuration for our instances for which the
>>client
>>ports, address in use is invariant across instance restarts.
>>
>>
>
> Why not let t
.
Scott Stark
Chief Technology Officer
JBoss Group, LLC
- Original Message -
From: "Anatoly Akkerman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 2:04 PM
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [JBoss-
>
> > // The service JMX name
> > String jmxName;
> > // The virtualHost the service wants to bind to which may be null
> > String virtualHost;
> > // The name of the JBoss service instance to support always giving an
> > // instance the same values
> > String serverName;
>
>
> I'm lost. What is t
ROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 1:01 PM
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss in a multi developers
environment
> Ya, duh. Is hostName also mappable? If so, I think this interface would
> be better:
>
> void allocateServicePort(String se
Scott M Stark wrote:
> There are at least these attributes that should go into the request
> object say ServiceBinding:
Much better name.
> // The service JMX name
> String jmxName;
> // The virtualHost the service wants to bind to which may be null
> String virtualHost;
> // The name of the
instance.
Scott Stark
Chief Technology Officer
JBoss Group, LLC
- Original Message -
From: "Dan Christopherson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 12:59 PM
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Re:
Dan Christopherson wrote:
> Dain Sundstrom wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Mike Finn wrote:
>>
>> Don't know. I would say that the client would need to configure it by
>> hand. This is what you do when you have many developers working on a
>> web app. I know that my server port is 8098.
>
>
> Right, bu
- Original Message -
From: "Mike Finn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 12:25 PM
Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss in a multi developers
environment
>Q 1) I assume "service name" would be the JBoss
Ya, duh. Is hostName also mappable? If so, I think this interface would
be better:
void allocateServicePort(String serviceName, ServicePort servicePort);
void deallocateServicePort(String serviceName, ServicePort servicePort);
ServicePort contains a hostName, port, and InetAddress. I don't li
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
>
>
> Mike Finn wrote:
>
> Don't know. I would say that the client would need to configure it by
> hand. This is what you do when you have many developers working on a
> web app. I know that my server port is 8098.
Right, but you don't get that if you hand them out i
Mike Finn wrote:
> I had been working on an alternative solution to this problem (see
> earlier thread in Mid-April: "Multiple Instances"). After some
> thought and work, this (Dain's) seems more robust (at least to me).
> The other way was effectively a proxy server sitting on a single
>
Mike Finn wrote:
> I had been working on an alternative solution to this problem (see earlier thread in
>Mid-April: "Multiple Instances"). After some thought and work, this (Dain's) seems
>more robust (at least to me). The other way was effectively a proxy server sitting on
>a single (known) po
t; -Original Message- From:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of Dain Sundstrom Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 3:17 PM To:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev]
> Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss in a multi developers environment
>
>
> Scott M St
No, the signature has to be at least:
{int, InetAddress} getPort(String serviceName, String hostName,
int defaultPort, InetAddress defaultAddress);
The address on which to bind the port is also a mappable property.
Scott Stark
Chief Technology Officer
JBoss
Behalf Of Dain
Sundstrom
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 3:17 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss in a multi developers
environment
Scott M Stark wrote:
> A port is not sufficient. This needs to provide the complete mapping
> of {int port, InetAddress ifAddress
OK, given the title of this thread, am I the only one who's featuring a
bunch of people developing J2EE programs on vt100 terminals? OK, that's
a bit ridiculous - XTerms I suppose anyway.
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
> Jules Gosnell wrote:
>
>> OK - that's not so bad. I can interface Jetty to it - n
Dain Sundstrom wrote:
> Jules Gosnell wrote:
>
>> OK - that's not so bad. I can interface Jetty to it - no problem.
>
>
>
> Well that's one vote. We'll have to wait to see if everyone else agrees.
>
>
>> I'm still a little concerned about this centralisation creeping
>> outwards. Are ports
This might actually be the easiest way to do this... If you could run
each instance on it's own IP then all of the instances could use the
default ports. From the ISP side, this would make things very easy.
-James
www.wantJAVA.com
> -Original Message-
> From: Matthew French [mailto:[E
it in the object
returned from the JNDI server? (Probably a dumb one, but not obvious to me).
#mike
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Dain
Sundstrom
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 2:44 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Re:
Scott M Stark wrote:
> A port is not sufficient. This needs to provide the complete mapping
> of {int port, InetAddress ifAddress} with at least the possibility of
> inputing:
>
> - service name
> - virtual hostname
> - int defaultPort
> - InetAddress defaultAddress
>
Sure. Then we have the
JBoss Group, LLC
- Original Message -
From: "Dain Sundstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 11:43 AM
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Re: [JBoss-user] JBoss in a multi developers
environment
> Jules Gosnell wro
Jules Gosnell wrote:
> OK - that's not so bad. I can interface Jetty to it - no problem.
Well that's one vote. We'll have to wait to see if everyone else agrees.
> I'm still a little concerned about this centralisation creeping
> outwards. Are ports the only resource over which different i
OK - that's not so bad. I can interface Jetty to it - no problem.
I'm still a little concerned about this centralisation creeping
outwards. Are ports the only resource over which different instances of
JBoss running on the same box are likely to collide ?
We should also bear in mind that certa
[I moved this to the dev list]
I think the real power of JMX is you can have disparate components that
can all talk to a central object without becoming tightly coupled.
Here is my idea:
We have an optional port server MBean. Before a service opens a port it
checks for the existence of the p
51 matches
Mail list logo
