You're not just going ahead and changing this! That's not the way we do
things. If you do we will have a problem.
However, we can discuss it rationally if you want. My issues with this are:
a) Late changes. Introducing what is essentially a new feature, which would
need to be tested and confirmed by QA. You will never get QA guys to do
this, they are swamped. You'd have to write an automated test for this
setup at the very least, but QA would still need to have time to verify.
This would have to be accepted by QA first or it would be marked as tech
b) The setup doesn't make sense. Most people use NGINX or Apache for
loadbalancer, not Undertow.
c) The setup won't actually work. H2 kinda works if you point to a shared
database, but not properly. H2 lazy writes changes to file, so it wouldn't
work for concurrent requests. You'd have to setup an embedded H2 server
with the TCP connection.
d) Domain mode is not just for clustering. It's to manage groups of
servers. A perfectly valid domain mode setup could be one domain
controller, one group with one EAP instance, one group with a RH SSO
instance and another group with two RH SSO instances in a cluster.
On 24 April 2016 at 20:47, Bill Burke <bburke(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 4/24/2016 1:56 PM, Marek Posolda wrote:
Do you think that people will use cluster with 2 nodes on localhost +
embedded H2 + static loadbalancer in production? I guess not. So having our
domain.xml "pre-set" to have easy example cluster setup won't help much
IMO. Customers will be able to setup "easy" cluster in 5 minutes, but they
will be unaware of all the steps they need to set the real "production"
I honestly don't see what the big deal is. The current default domain
setup won't work in a cluster either.
I'm changing it... and that's that....It allows me to walk through an
out-of-the-box example that can run on somebody's laptop. If either you
are Stian want to change it back, then you can rewrite the domain section
of the install guide.
JBoss, a division of Red Hathttp://bill.burkecentral.com