Ah okay so we may add feature packs to an already "provisioned" server.
I don't think it's a good idea for the provisioning to tool to stop and
start a server. If you stop shutdown a server, apply the new feature
packs and start a new process. The new process may inherit the parent
processes I/O which could be problematic.
James R. Perkins
JBoss by Red Hat
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 9:06 AM, Eduardo Martins <emartins(a)redhat.com>
The provisioning tool assembles a server from a set of feature packs,
it will also be able to customize the assembled and possibly running
server, for instance add feature pack, add modules, etc.
On 04 Sep 2014, at 16:51, James R. Perkins <jperkins(a)redhat.com>
> If I understand it correctly the provisioning tool is used to create
> a server. What server will be running that would need to be stopped
> and then restarted? This doesn't sound like a provisioning thing to
> me. Is it also meant to do patching?
> James R. Perkins
> JBoss by Red Hat
> On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 6:06 AM, Eduardo Martins
> <emartins(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>> Perhaps we should start with extending the capabilities of the
>> (standalone) server provisioner api, that we now use to build the
>> server, to stop a server, upgrade it offline, and start it again.
>> The offline upgrade would for now first delete files that were
>> added in the previous version of the server provision, supporting
>> excludes/includes filters to don’t mess with user/server data,
>> and then provision “everything” again, skipping files that were
>> kept in the output dir. Tools would have access to the previous
>> version of the server provision and start editing from that.
>> On 04 Sep 2014, at 05:16, Stuart Douglas <sdouglas(a)redhat.com>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>> Work on the provisioning tool is now well underway, so I would
>>> like to
>>> revisit something I mentioned in my original email, which is
>>> the provisioning tool to customize a provisioned server.
>>> I think there are a few options here, some more palatable than
>>> In no particular order:
>>> 1) Customize the XML directly
>>> Using this approach we would just directly customize the XML
>>> configuration files. This would basically require the use of XSLT
>>> (yuck), or require us to basically invent our own version of XSLT
>>> more yuck). Even though this approach will work, and will be
>>> fairly easy
>>> to implement, I think it would really suck from an end-user point
>>> view, and I think we should discount it.
>>> 2) Allow the user to provide CLI commands to customise the server
>>> This is by far my favorite approach. The provisioning file would
>>> contain a list of CLI commands, and would execute them in order.
>>> I think
>>> this is by far the most intuitive, and the CLI is well documented.
>>> 3) Allow the user to provide DMR operations to customize the
>>> Similar to 2, but allow the user to provide DMR or JSON
>>> operations to
>>> customize the server. I think this is not nearly as nice as 2, as
>>> are much more likely to be familiar with the CLI rather than DMR.
>>> I think 2 is by far the best approach, however it does open up the
>>> question of how and when to execute the operations. I think the
>>> way to do this would be to just start the server in admin only
>>> mode on a
>>> custom port (so it will not interfere with any existing running
>>> instances), and just execute the CLI commands in admin only mode.
>>> Does this all sound reasonable?
>>> wildfly-dev mailing list
>> wildfly-dev mailing list