April 2010 - jboss-dev-forums - Jboss List Archives

Re: [jboss-dev-forums] [Management Development] - To scope or not to scope (domain.xml)

by Scott Stark

Scott Stark [http://community.jboss.org/people/scott.stark%40jboss.org] replied to the discussion "To scope or not to scope (domain.xml)" To view the discussion, visit: http://community.jboss.org/message/536654#536654 -------------------------------------------------------------- That is really something that is outside of the domain model as I see it, at least in terms of the level of the cluster element in some bean configuration. At the domain level it would show up as a cluster-config-ref or some such in the associated bean container, but doubtful that admins are going to be tweaking bean specific containers. -------------------------------------------------------------- Reply to this message by going to Community [http://community.jboss.org/message/536654#536654] Start a new discussion in Management Development at Community [http://community.jboss.org/choose-container!input.jspa?contentType=1&cont...]

16 years

1
0
0 / 0

Re: [jboss-dev-forums] [Management Development] - Domain model work in AS 6.0.0

by Scott Stark

Scott Stark [http://community.jboss.org/people/scott.stark%40jboss.org] replied to the discussion "Domain model work in AS 6.0.0" To view the discussion, visit: http://community.jboss.org/message/536650#536650 -------------------------------------------------------------- For the YES, this is my quick overview. Again my concern is having suffucient structure to be able to evolve the domain model, but a sufficiently limited scope in terms of content to be able to have an implementation. bindingservice.beans - All of the containers/services intersected by this need associated entries in the domain model such that this configuration can be dropped. login-config.xml, hornetq-*.properties, jbossws-*.properties, jmx-console-*.properties - definitely need a domain model for security stacks and users. properties-service.xml - Need to define how jvm, system properties are pulled in to control bootstrap and affect other configurations that reference properties. jboss-logging.xml - I guess this is pretty much pulled into the domain? *{container}.deployer/.xml, deploy/hornetq/hornetq-configuration.xml, thread-pool-j-b.xml - In general, I think we need the following common mappings for containers in the domain metadata: - thread pools - clustering groups - transport stacks - instance pools legacy-conf-jboss-service.xml - shouldn't this just be eliminated? hsqldb-ds.xml, any other resource factory - We need a server resources factory configuration model forthe various standard types. mod_cluster.sar, jboss-cache-manager.sar, jgroups-channel-factory.sar, deploy-hasingleton-jboss-beans.xml, farm-deployment-j-b.xml, hajndi-j-b.xml, hapartition-jboss-beans.xml, - Need a cluster domain metadata model jbossweb.sar/server.xml, ejb3-connectors-j-b.xml, remoting3-j-b.xml, remoting-j-b.xml, xnio-provider.jar - Need a connector/transport domain metadata model jacorb.properties, mail-service.xml, monitoring-service.xml, schedule-manager-service.xml, scheduler-service.xml, juddi-service.sar, snmp-adaptor.sar, uuid-key-generator.sar, monitoring-service.xml, *-activator-j-b.xml, - I don't see these as being in scope for an initial release -------------------------------------------------------------- Reply to this message by going to Community [http://community.jboss.org/message/536650#536650] Start a new discussion in Management Development at Community [http://community.jboss.org/choose-container!input.jspa?contentType=1&cont...]

16 years

1
0
0 / 0

Re: [jboss-dev-forums] [Management Development] - Domain model work in AS 6.0.0

by Scott Stark

Scott Stark [http://community.jboss.org/people/scott.stark%40jboss.org] replied to the discussion "Domain model work in AS 6.0.0" To view the discussion, visit: http://community.jboss.org/message/536641#536641 -------------------------------------------------------------- One thing we have to be clear on is that the domain.xml is going to address a small set of what is configurable via the large number of metadata files Brian has listed. The scope of the model is largely going to be based on timeboxing. I agree with Jason that we need to have an idea of what the admin DSL model is over the long term as the model has to evolve in a compatible way in order for it to be a stable admin API. -------------------------------------------------------------- Reply to this message by going to Community [http://community.jboss.org/message/536641#536641] Start a new discussion in Management Development at Community [http://community.jboss.org/choose-container!input.jspa?contentType=1&cont...]

16 years

1
0
0 / 0

Re: [jboss-dev-forums] [Management Development] - To scope or not to scope (domain.xml)

by Scott Stark

Scott Stark [http://community.jboss.org/people/scott.stark%40jboss.org] replied to the discussion "To scope or not to scope (domain.xml)" To view the discussion, visit: http://community.jboss.org/message/536640#536640 -------------------------------------------------------------- > Brian Stansberry wrote: > > > > This was what I meant by the cluster-service tag, a way to specify how a group would cluster a particular service (maybe not all services should be clustered). Although it was just something I through out there as an example. A better way likely exists > > Currently how we cluster a particular service is defined in that service's configuration, it's not something applied externally. And the details of what needs to be configured are often disparate between different services, so I'm not sure those configs can profitably be externalized into some common configuration element. > > Ah, or are you talking about "clustered-service" as a wrapper to describe how to manage the service, e.g. how to (re)deploy across cluster? But this is something that needs to change in the sense that basic things like what stack the ejb/web/jms/cluster aware container is using has to be a domain level setting that admins control as well as these stacks in terms of an admin clustering DSL. That config is then mapped onto the container metadata that controls the clustering behavior. -------------------------------------------------------------- Reply to this message by going to Community [http://community.jboss.org/message/536640#536640] Start a new discussion in Management Development at Community [http://community.jboss.org/choose-container!input.jspa?contentType=1&cont...]

16 years

1
0
0 / 0

Re: [jboss-dev-forums] [EJB 3.0 Development] - ejb3_1 and its relation with ejb3 bom

by jaikiran pai

jaikiran pai [http://community.jboss.org/people/jaikiran] replied to the discussion "ejb3_1 and its relation with ejb3 bom" To view the discussion, visit: http://community.jboss.org/message/536627#536627 -------------------------------------------------------------- The other option that I have been thinking of is to get rid of ejb3_1 entirely. That way we will have a bom which will both have dependencyManagement and dependencies specified. Effectively, that will act as the entity which manages the right versions and also let's the consuming projects (like AS) "depend" (so that dependencies are pulled in the CP) as well as import it. So we would probably end up having bom-as6 (multiple version), bom-as-6.1 (multiple versions) artifacts. -------------------------------------------------------------- Reply to this message by going to Community [http://community.jboss.org/message/536627#536627] Start a new discussion in EJB 3.0 Development at Community [http://community.jboss.org/choose-container!input.jspa?contentType=1&cont...]

16 years

1
0
0 / 0

Re: [jboss-dev-forums] [EJB 3.0 Development] - ejb3_1 and its relation with ejb3 bom

by jaikiran pai

jaikiran pai [http://community.jboss.org/people/jaikiran] replied to the discussion "ejb3_1 and its relation with ejb3 bom" To view the discussion, visit: http://community.jboss.org/message/536626#536626 -------------------------------------------------------------- > Andrew Rubinger wrote: > > > If the BOM is the parent of the ejb3_1 module, then the ejb3_1 module will have the correct exported dependencies. Now something else, project X, makes a depedendency upon ejb3_1. Any "exclusion"s defined by the BOM will be *ignored*. This is because Project X doesn't have the BOM in its hierarchy. The way around this is to declare in Project X a dependency twice upon ejb3_1; once in "dependencies", once in "dependencyManagement" (with scope import). > > S, > ALR The project X that I was considering was AS. So we would have something like: ejb3_1 module pom.xml: <parent> <artifactId>bom-as6</artifactId> <version>0.1.3</version> </parent> <artifactId>jboss-ejb3_1</artifactId> bom-as6 pom.xml: <artifactId>bom-as6</artifactId> <dependencyManagement> <dependency> <artifactId>jboss-ejb3-core</artifactId> <version>1.3.2</version> </dependency>  </dependencyManagement> JBoss AS component-matrix pom.xml (or some module which "imports" the bom) <dependencyManagement> <dependency> <artifactId>bom-as6</artifactId> <scope>import</scope> </dependency> </dependencyManagement> The AS/ejb3 module pom.xml would add "dependency" on *ejb3_1* <dependencies> <dependency> <artifactId>jboss-ejb3_1</artifactId>  </dependency> </dependencies> But like I said in my previous post, making bom-as6 the parent of ejb3_1 may not work out. -------------------------------------------------------------- Reply to this message by going to Community [http://community.jboss.org/message/536626#536626] Start a new discussion in EJB 3.0 Development at Community [http://community.jboss.org/choose-container!input.jspa?contentType=1&cont...]

16 years

1
0
0 / 0

Re: [jboss-dev-forums] [EJB 3.0 Development] - ejb3_1 and its relation with ejb3 bom

by jaikiran pai

jaikiran pai [http://community.jboss.org/people/jaikiran] replied to the discussion "ejb3_1 and its relation with ejb3 bom" To view the discussion, visit: http://community.jboss.org/message/536625#536625 -------------------------------------------------------------- > Andrew Rubinger wrote: > > > jaikiran pai wrote: > > As such, I think that the ejb3 bom as-6 should be the parent for the ejb3_1 module. That way, the ejb3_1 module pom will just declare the dependencies and let the parent bom declare the dependency versions. > I think this is good > (I think) there's a catch though. The ejb3_1 module can go into both AS6.0 and AS6.1 (let's assume we have it). And AS6.0 and AS6.1 will have separate bom artifacts. So we won't be able to mark this bom as the parent for ejb3_1. -------------------------------------------------------------- Reply to this message by going to Community [http://community.jboss.org/message/536625#536625] Start a new discussion in EJB 3.0 Development at Community [http://community.jboss.org/choose-container!input.jspa?contentType=1&cont...]

16 years

1
0
0 / 0

Re: [jboss-dev-forums] [Management Development] - To scope or not to scope (domain.xml)

by Emanuel Muckenhuber

Emanuel Muckenhuber [http://community.jboss.org/people/emuckenhuber] replied to the discussion "To scope or not to scope (domain.xml)" To view the discussion, visit: http://community.jboss.org/message/536624#536624 -------------------------------------------------------------- > Brian Stansberry wrote: > So, yeah, using <cluster/> as a trigger to add some extra capabilities sounds good. Yeah, that's the goal or at least the direction i would like to go. I would like to look at some more use cases to see what's really needed and if this can be handled in a better way. In the end ProfileService is limited in what it can/should do - so it's the combination of module requirements (deploy only what's needed), on-demand beans (start only what's needed) and something like your on demand profile activation which needs to make sense altogether. -------------------------------------------------------------- Reply to this message by going to Community [http://community.jboss.org/message/536624#536624] Start a new discussion in Management Development at Community [http://community.jboss.org/choose-container!input.jspa?contentType=1&cont...]

16 years

1
0
0 / 0

Re: [jboss-dev-forums] [Management Development] - Domain model work in AS 6.0.0

by Brian Stansberry

Brian Stansberry [http://community.jboss.org/people/bstansberry%40jboss.com] replied to the discussion "Domain model work in AS 6.0.0" To view the discussion, visit: http://community.jboss.org/message/536623#536623 -------------------------------------------------------------- > Scott Stark wrote: > > The first step in deciding if the 6.0 GA is possible is what the minimal schema that makes the effort worthwhile. Partly in response to this and partly because it seemed useful in general, I did a rough analysis[1] of which of the AS's existing configuration files include content that needs to be represented in a domain model. For each file (or dir in the case of exploded deployments), I assigned it to a category: * YES -- includes relevant end-user configuration * BORDERLINE -- some end-user configuration but not clear if they need to be managed * QUESTIONABLE -- more doubtful than BORDERLINE * PROBABLY NOT -- NO, but worth another look * NO -- doesn't involve end-user configuration, e.g. purely IOC stuff Basically a vague sliding scale as to whether we need to concern ourself with a particular file. [1] attached for now to http://community.jboss.org/docs/DOC-15098 Jason's requirements wiki -------------------------------------------------------------- Reply to this message by going to Community [http://community.jboss.org/message/536623#536623] Start a new discussion in Management Development at Community [http://community.jboss.org/choose-container!input.jspa?contentType=1&cont...]

16 years

1
0
0 / 0

Re: [jboss-dev-forums] [EJB 3.0 Development] - BOMs Away - Composing Dependency Management

by Andrew Rubinger

Andrew Rubinger [http://community.jboss.org/people/ALRubinger] replied to the discussion "BOMs Away - Composing Dependency Management" To view the discussion, visit: http://community.jboss.org/message/536622#536622 -------------------------------------------------------------- Better reply in other thread: http://community.jboss.org/thread/150500 ejb3_1 and its relation with ejb3 bom S, ALR -------------------------------------------------------------- Reply to this message by going to Community [http://community.jboss.org/message/536622#536622] Start a new discussion in EJB 3.0 Development at Community [http://community.jboss.org/choose-container!input.jspa?contentType=1&cont...]

16 years

1
0
0 / 0

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

jboss-dev-forums April 2010