[jboss-as7-dev] node0, node1 and port offsets

[Jason Greene]

Are you up to date? I fixed a bunch of those last week.

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 13, 2012, at 2:23 AM, Richard Achmatowicz <rachmato at redhat.com> wrote:

> Hi
> 
> I've just spent a lot of time tracking down some problems with tests 
> failing with two IPv6 addresses which lead me to some arquillian.xml 
> files, like this:
> 
> <group qualifier="iiop">
> 
> <!-- The server than invokes the exposed EJB's -->
> <container qualifier="iiop-client" default="true">
> <configuration>
> <property name="jbossHome">${basedir}/target/jbossas-iiop-client</property>
> <property name="javaVmArguments">${server.jvm.args} 
> -Djboss.inst=${basedir}/target/jbossas-iiop-client</property>
> <property 
> name="serverConfig">${jboss.server.config.file.name:standalone.xml}</property>
> <property name="managementAddress">${node0}</property>
> <property name="managementPort">${as.managementPort:9999}</property>
> </configuration>
> </container>
> 
> <!-- The server that expsoses EJB's via IIOP -->
> <container qualifier="iiop-server" default="false">
> <configuration>
> <property name="jbossHome">${basedir}/target/jbossas-iiop-server</property>
> <property name="javaVmArguments">${server.jvm.args}</property>
> <property 
> name="serverConfig">${jboss.server.config.file.name:standalone.xml}</property>
> <!-- we use port offsets in the configuration build -->
> <property name="managementAddress">${node1}</property>
> <property name="managementPort">10099</property>
> </configuration>
> </container>
> </group>
> 
> These configurations use both separate node IPs *and* port offsets, and 
> yet the builds for the configurations only use port offsets. This 
> results in Arquillian looking in the wrong place for some servers have 
> actually started. For example, the arquillian.xml configuration above 
> tells arquillian to look for a host running at ${node1}:10099; but the 
> server configuration built by iiop-build.xml uses port offsets, so the 
> second server's managment address is ${node0}:10099. The test fails 
> because Arquillian can never connect to the host ${node1}:10099. We have 
> some tests which use a single node and port offsets, some tests which 
> use distinct nodes and port offsets, and I also expect some tests which 
> use distinct nodes and no offsets.
> 
> In the past, we have used two approaches to run two servers on a single 
> node: using distinct IP addresses and the same ports or using a single 
> IP address and ports distinguished by port offsets. The first was the 
> standard case; the second was generally used for testing the port offset 
> mechanism, IIRC. We need one or the other but not both.
> 
> Should we consider returning to that standard in which we use distinct 
> IPs and no offsets for the general case, and only use port offsets when 
> testing the port offset mechanism?. Using two separate interfaces rather 
> than one arguably a more realistic test than one interface with port 
> offsets. Also, having different multi-host configurations for each test 
> makes debugging more of a pain, as it is one less thing you can assume 
> about a test when trying to figure out what is going on. Also, looking 
> at different IPs in two sets of logs is easier and less error prone than 
> calculating offsets in your head in my experience.
> 
> The problem configurations I saw were in integration/iiop, 
> integration/manual-mode, and integration/multi-node.
> 
> Richard
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> jboss-as7-dev mailing list
> jboss-as7-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev