We develop web application and we are going to deploy it on JBoss.
Now we use JSF, Facelets, Webflow, JMX, Spring.
We are going to use JMS(ActiveMQ).
Maybe in the future we will use EJB3. But for near future we will not use it.
What configuration of JBoss would be better to use - web, standard, default?
And why?
Go for the smallest config that does what you need. The "web" configuration seems to have everything you need, including ejb3 support.
Remember, the configurations in the distribution are just examples. It's perfectly acceptable to create custom server configs by copying the deployers and libs around to produce a config that does exactly what you need.
I've never found the need to use anything other than default, sometimes removing some of the config. And that's included JMS, EJB, Spring, Webflow, etc.
I you are using JBoss AS 5.1.X, I recommend this book: http://www.amazon.com/JBoss-AS-Development-Marchioni-Francesco/dp/1847196829
On page 31 there is a detailed explanation about the five provided configurations.
Related
Based on my understanding, all the components in RedHat BRMS can be achieved by integrating various drools components. So, is it a bad idea to use drools in Production?
Not at all. The difference is that if you pay RedHat you will have support from them if you need advice or you find any problem.
If you use the Open Source version, you will have all of the features present in the payed version (or even more), but you are basically on your own.
Hope it helps,
Along with support you will get patches on regular basis for reported issues. You wont get any patch for community release of Drools/jBPM.
I am experimenting JRuby on Rails and need some guidance/tips in choosing the server. I have used nginx (and passenger) for my RoR in the past. JRuby wiki page Servers provide a lot of options and I have no experience in any of them.
What I am looking for is a simple to install, easy to scale server or the one widely used (so that I can find solutions if I am stuck)
I do realize this might be a broad question and the answer would be "it depends..." but would appreciate some pointers.
I might be biased being on the Trinidad team, but I still think it's top ... esp. as it handles high concurrency well while still being much lighter than TorqueBox (which I would also recommend if you do want something beyond just a web server e.g. built-in jobs but be aware that some of it is TB/JRuby specific). Most other options mentioned are Java web servers, which you can rule out if you do not want to install a Java server, warbling your application and deploying it as a .war file.
p.s. for the (next) version 1.5.0 re-deploys are to be revisited and one should be able to do some (memory leak-free) zero-down time deployments.
I am using for an alternative to OpenGrok. I can't configure it properly. What I want is to browse to the code, like I would be in Visual Studio. I'd like to have a menu with a minimum option of Go To Definition, find references etc. How can that be achieved ?
I suggest to have a look at the Woboq Code Browser.
It works like a compile step and dynamically analyzes the code and how symbols are linked to each other.
Did you have problems configuring it on Windows?
OpenGrok works best through a web-server. You might find it easier to rent some cheap VPS box, and configure OpenGrok remotely on such server (instead of trying to configure it locally on a Windows box), and then use your web-browser to access the remotely-running OpenGrok instance through the web-interface.
I've once tried using OpenGrok locally on a Windows machine, and even though it worked, I was not happy that the non-web version didn't have any syntax highlighting, and was overall just way too awkward to be of any real use.
There's Text-Sherlock. And the github project. It can use either Whoosh or Xapian as its backend.
I would recommend Codatlas. It has features such as jump-to-definition and cross-reference and poly-glot support such as C/C++, Java, Python, Scala etc.
I often find the quote "InstallUtil.exe" is an ugly pattern or "Don't use InstallUtil.exe" and that I should use native WIX or Installation package patterns and I still don't understood why.
I stepped away from using InstallUtil to install a .NET service as I finally learnt that writing registry keys for such an action should be an un-install-able action - and I've come to terms with this as correct.
As I've been working through my WIX installer for a relatively complex product, I have found myself in need of creating or updating SQL Server databases, creating or updating IIS Applications and finally updating or creating configuration files.
Each of my components (features) are optional, but they all share the same configuration file. As my product uses unity, its important to note that this library contains strong support for reading/updating/removing components from the Unity Configuration block, therefore it seems fairly smart to me that I should take advantages of these blocks via Installation Components (i.e. InstallUtil) to create or update my configuration file at installation time.
Just to be clear here, my installer does not natively contain a configuration file for my application: at installation time, the installer has no idea as to the shape of it as its based on the features selected. Surely I should be embedding this knowledge into each of the modules that are to be deployed and not in the remit of the installer which is now a completely independent project? Wouldn't this break O-O principals even if we are talking about installation?
I'd really appreciate some guidance as to whether this is good practise or not? Am I reading 'InstallUtil' is bad for installing services, or is it that using 'InstallUtil' is bad full-stop? If so, what are my options for smart updating of configuration files?
The main reason for avoiding InstallUtil is that it runs outside of the installation transaction, so Windows Installer cannot keep track of what it's done.
I have used InstallUtil on a few occasions, when I just couldn't get Wix to do what I needed and didn't have time to write a custom action. In this case I called the InstallUtilLib version as I feel this is a cleaner approach.
I used the this blog as a guide as to how to achieve this.
Hey all,
I'm curious if you can use a jboss SAR to hold all the xml, class files, and even lib files that, if you were using tomcat, were traditionally in the /shared/classes, shared/lib locations into a SAR.
The intent is that instead of messing around in the jboss/conf/ directory to simply deploy an 'appconfig.sar' beside your actual app.war/app.ear.
Example usecase is Alfresco shared/classes/*..
thanks for any feedback!
I would say this depends on your JBoss version and the ClassLoadingConfiguration you're using. I can work, but then it can just as easily break in the next version of JBoss. JBoss 7 is very strict for example.
In general I would not rely on the specific behavior of a specific JBoss version and package my dependencies with my application. If you want to share dependencies between several .war then consider having then all in in an .ear and the dependencies in .ear/lib.