Marc,

  that definitely sounds close to what I am trying to achieve. In case
you do indeed go about making those modifications available, I would
certainly volunteer to review and provide feedback. 

Thanks,
  Henning

Am Donnerstag, den 02.07.2009, 09:31 -0400 schrieb Marc Morin:

> We have made multi-tenant modifications to ofbiz to run on a single VM.  We 
> have not contributed this back to the community yet, but plan on it.
> 
> In our implementation,  each tenant is running the same application suite, 
> and they differ only in the database configurations via the entityengine.xml. 
>  We've essentially, made "templates" for the entity engine entries that allow 
> each tenant to have their own delegator.  This means, depending upon how you 
> configure the entityengine.xml file, you can have each tenant have a private 
> copy of the entire schema, or share components via the use of entity groups.
> 
> There are some limitations in our design choices, that were appropriate for 
> our use (for now):
> 
> 1- We provide each tenant with a separate hostname, and then maintain a 
> hostname to delegator name mapping in a "main" database instance.  This is 
> the deployment meta data.  This is cumbersome and obviously has some extra 
> dependancy on proper DNS configuration.  This can be changed to a modified 
> "login" page of some sort.
> 2- Haven't completed the job manager to have a singleton across tenants.  
> Right now, the job manager is instantiated for each delegator, so, if you 
> have 1000 tenants, you'd have a 1000 threats.. not scalable.  Plan on fixing 
> that.
> 3- Each tenant must share the same configuration files, means each tenant 
> must be running same "application" or solution.
> 4- Currently each UserLogin entity is a private entity per tenant.  Makes for 
> improved isolation, but harder to manage all the login credentials to the 
> system.  We have an LDAP infrastructure and have debated using that for 
> credential management.
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Henning" <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Sent: Thursday, July 2, 2009 7:28:21 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
> Subject: Using OfBiz modular, partially, and in many instances
> 
> Hi Experts,
> 
>   I would like to embed OfBiz with a module environment (not OSGi - but
> sufficiently similar to think OSGi if that helps) and for multiple
> tenants on one VM. The latter is the the stronger requirement for me.
> But as far as modularization is concerned, Ofbiz seems to be in good
> shape: The individual logical projects (under framework and
> applications) that are all packaged up as one Eclipse project can be
> broken up into smaller projects that have a beautiful and meaningful
> dependency chain and still compile (at least). Executing them is
> probably another story.
> 
>   Now in terms of multi-tenant usage, I would love to be able to run
> different "instances" of OfBiz within the same server. So every tenant
> would get its own OfBiz configuration (including its own data source
> configuration). OfBiz features would actually be something additional,
> integrated with another application and OfBiz would not be the leading
> infastructure.
> 
>   I remember having seen some similar discussions on the mailing list
> some time ago - they all seemed to go nowhere. To me it seems that using
> OfBiz as the fundamental functional underpinning and toolbox for
> anything eCommerce is a very natural path to follow, but it should not
> have unbreakable ties to exactly one underlying infrastructure. I
> understand that OfBiz has spent some effort into creating its own module
> system (kind of) - that's perfectly fine and seeing OfBiz run
> out-of-the-box after 5min. is perfect. However, other places, other
> infrastructures. 
> 
>   Anyway, if anybody has a pointer to something that is similar to what
> I described above or some success story, it would be great, if you could
> let me know. Of course, if there is good reasons why this cannot work
> w/o touching OfBiz in an unknown but huge number of places that would
> also be valuable information.
> 
>   If I end up getting it done myself and if there is interest, I will be
> happy to share my experience.
> 
> Thanks,
>   Henning

Reply via email to