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

[Jason Greene]

Jason Greene [http://community.jboss.org/people/jason.greene%40jboss.com] replied to the discussion

"To scope or not to scope (domain.xml)"

To view the discussion, visit: http://community.jboss.org/message/536347#536347

--------------------------------------------------------------
> Brian Stansberry wrote:
> 
> Excellent question!  We need to agree on the definition of some terms.
> 
> To me a "domain" is a set of servers meant to be managed as a unit (acknowledgment: how things are "managed as a unit" is vague/fuzzy; a key task is to clarify exactly what that means.) The servers don't need to all have a homogenous profile, as people may wish to tier things. (In example above written for the clustering meeting the "DataGrid" profile was meant to describe a bunch of servers running Infinispan to serve as large scale grid storage behind a JEE tier.)
> 
> I see a domain as needing to allow multiple clusters, even ignoring the different tier idea. Mutliple clusters are a useful mechanism for a rolling upgrade; you subdivide your overall capacity into N smaller clusters, and then can upgrade those by taking a cluster at a time off line. This is needed instead of a rolling upgrade of 1 server at a time within the same cluster if the new version of the app can't co-exist with the old in the same cluster (e.g. incompatible state).

I have a slightly simpler definition, but is essentially the same as what you are describing.  I used it in req 1:
"A *+domain+* is a management policy that applies to one or more servers/nodes, which may or may not be part of a cluster"

In other words, the only thing that every member of the domain has in common is the fact that they have the same domain.xml file.  A better definition would probably be. "A domain is a management policy that applies to one or more servers/nodes, which may or may not be part of a homogenous group". When you think about it, a server-group, and a cluster are really the same thing, the only difference is that the cluster has an additional set of services that a basic group does not. 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

--------------------------------------------------------------

Reply to this message by going to Community
[http://community.jboss.org/message/536347#536347]

Start a new discussion in Management Development at Community
[http://community.jboss.org/choose-container!input.jspa?contentType=1&containerType=14&container=2107]

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/jboss-dev-forums/attachments/20100408/97aa9776/attachment.html