[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [wtp-dev] Why is GenericServer serverdef tied to the runtime rather than the server type?
|
David,
I cannot say I understand your question clearly: Are you saying that
server+runtime is needed or it is not needed. If I can understand your
needs further, I am sure we can define requirements to meet them.
In any case, generic server support and the core server adapters are
exactly the same when it comes to how they deal with servers and
runtime. A runtime is not smt you can run or deploy module to. It is a
description of the runtime environment (i.e. typically where the shared
software is installed etc.)
A server configuration is smt you can run, debug publish modules etc.
It needs to be associated with a runtime. It needs the runtime to get
libs, jars, etc. What is more, each server configuration is associated
with a particular set of modules, apps, etc. Only these applications
and modules will be deployed to that server when it is run.
Therefore, in this architecture runtimes and servers are needed and each
runtime must be associated with a runtime.
The generic Serverdef file is a simple reflection of the WTP server
architecture. It parameterizes the ımplementation classes for the
"servers" and "runtimes". It is better to look at as a metafile that
supports these impl classes. It contains two types of parameters:
servers and runtimes and bunch of definitions that are used by the
generic server & runtime classes. There is only one file for
runtime/servers tuples, because it is simpler. Just an implementation
issue.
Ofcourse (like all the other server adapters) You can define multiple
runtimes based on this template (i.e. different installations). Runtime
properties that correspond to each definition is persisted as a separate
instances with the workspace.
Also, when you define server configurations (i.e. "server" in wtp
terminology) for a particular runtime instance , these are persisted
separately in the workspace or if user chooses (i.e. store in CVS), with
the project itself.
Hi,
Can anyone tell me why the GenericServer server definition (.serverdef) is
tied to the server runtime rather than to the server?
The use case I have is this: A module is associated with a runtime. There
can be several different kinds of server (local, remote, clustered) - but
they have the same runtime i.e. they have the same capabilities, the same
classpath etc. It should be possible to target the module at the runtime,
and then deploy it to any of the server types (without having to change the
runtime the module is targetted at).
I do not understand why, on the one hand the runtime and server type are
separate, but when using the GenericServer, the server definition is tied
back to the runtime, effectively requiring a 1:1 coupling between the server
and the runtime.
It seems to me that this defeats the point of the server and runtime
separation. Would it be possible to consider enhancing the design to allow
for this (IMO) key use case?
thanks
David
-------------------------
David Black
Cape Clear Software
_______________________________________________
wtp-dev mailing list
wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-dev
--
Naci Dai,
eteration a.s.
itu teknokent ari-1 25
Maslak, Istanbul 34469
+90 (533) 580 2393 (cell)
+90 (212) 328 0825 (phone)
+90 (212) 328 0521 (fax)
http://www.eteration.com/
mailto:naci@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
