meeting: bundle deployment to non-platforms

David A. Webster DAWEBSTER at UP.COM
Tue May 31 13:35:35 UTC 2011


I think it's a given that if you deploy an app server bundle (as in to 
install a fresh version of the server), or even to patch a server with a 
"clean" install, it means that all app deployments, jdbc connection pools, 
etc.,  get blown away.  Up to the bundle creator to keep track of that. An 
"incremental" app server bundle deployment, however, should not do 
that....

David Webster
Union Pacific Railroad
Lead Architect-Web Infrastructure
Systems Engineering
Phone: (402) 544-1094 | Email: dawebster at up.com



Jay Shaughnessy <jshaughn at redhat.com> 
Sent by: rhq-devel-bounces at lists.fedorahosted.org
05/27/2011 11:09 AM
Please respond to
rhq-devel at lists.fedorahosted.org


To
rhq-devel at lists.fedorahosted.org
cc

Subject
Re: meeting: bundle deployment to non-platforms








On 5/27/2011 11:46 AM, Ian Springer wrote:
> On 05/27/2011 11:15 AM, John Mazzitelli wrote:
>>> * Originally bundles were designed to lay down complete servers (app
>>> server with apps already in place, etc).   The latest proposal moves
>>> toward smaller, one-off  deployments.  We may need to work out the
>>> semantics around when one bundle's deployment dir is a subdir of 
another
>>> bundle's deployment dir.  For example, bundle-1 is an app-server and
>>> bundle-2 is a web-app.  And then bundle-1 gets reverted...
>> yet another good question - we need to think about this. deploying a
>> bundle inside a bundle will be problematic.
>
> I think the solution here would be for the user to make sure the outer
> bundle includes the deploy directory in the list of directories to 
ignore.
>
> We could help alleviate this by checking if the selected destination dir
> is a subdir of any other deployed bundle's destination dir before
> deploying the bundle. The warning could look something like this:
>
> "Warning: The selected destination directory
> '/opt/jboss-eap-5.1.1.GA/jboss-as/default/server/deploy' is a
> subdirectory of the deployed bundle 'JBoss EAP' v2.0. Future updates of
> the 'JBoss EAP' bundle could blow away the 'MyEnterpriseApp.ear' bundle
> unless the 'JBoss EAP' bundle is configured to ignore the
> '/opt/jboss-eap-5.1.1.GA/jboss-as/default/server/deploy' directory. Are
> you sure you want to proceed?"
We need a solution that does not require one bundle's design to need 
knowledge of a future bundle's needs. It may not even be possible.  I'd 
favor an approach that has very autonomous bundle behavior and just 
clearly states the semantics. The fact is that nothing prevents the user 
from deploying server-level bundles.  So, if they opt for more-granular 
bundle deployments, potentially on top of another bundle's deployment, 
then we just need to make clear what will happen. In fact it may be no 
different that what happens today.  Which, I think is a revert back to 
the previous deployment that maintains changed files. Not sure.  I think 
we may want to avoid introducing any concept of bundle hierarchy, it 
would be quite complex.  Tags and Descriptions may be enough to do what 
is needed.

This is not too unlike keeping support for "clean" deployments.  When 
selected it means the entire deploy directory is wiped prior to laying 
down the new bits. This obviously could have impact on layered bundling, 
and certainly could be detrimental to something like a deploy 
directory.  And that is why everything to do with bundling should be 
done first in test, then perhaps in staging, and finally in production 
envs.  And that is exactly what bundle destinations are all about. The 
idea being that destinations can be set up for test/stage/prod envs, 
with perhaps different bundle versions deployed to each, in a 
progressive lifecycle.

>>> * Question - where is the deployment meta-data kept?  It can't be 
stored
>>> under the deploy directory, right?
>> and yet another good question. We do support the ability to deploy
>> bundles in the deploy/ directory (if you enable that new feature where
>> the recipe tells us to not fully manage the root dest dir). HOWEVER, 
you
>> can only deploy ONE bundle to it. You can't deploy more than one 
because
>> the metadata will overlap/overwrite each other. So this is something
>> else to think about.
> In the case of deploying an exploded ear or war, the bundle metadata
> could potentially be stored in the ear or war directory. However, this
> wouldn't work out if the ear or was deployed as a file, or for a bundle
> that included multiple deployments (e.g. an ear, a sar, and a ds.xml
> file), so I think we're going to have to add support for multiple
> bundles deployed to the same destination directory.
I was concerned about even the validity of placing files under some of 
these potential destination directories.

> _______________________________________________
> rhq-devel mailing list
> rhq-devel at lists.fedorahosted.org
> https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/rhq-devel
>
_______________________________________________
rhq-devel mailing list
rhq-devel at lists.fedorahosted.org
https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/rhq-devel



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://fedorahosted.org/pipermail/rhq-devel/attachments/20110531/794896d1/attachment.html 


More information about the rhq-devel mailing list