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 preview.

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 <> 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" cluster.

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.

Bill Burke
JBoss, a division of Red Hat