Re: Deployment throw DirectConnect

Hi All !

Maybe I am wrong, but we have done that in the past, so the following should
be true:

  -- Concurrent Request handling is not limited through direct connect.
     It is only configured through a command line parameter ...

  -- of course you can use SSL if you connect through Apache + mod_proxy.
     But note, that some SSL related Request Headers are only set through
     the Adaptor and not when using mod_proxy (with mod_proxy you have others).
     This is also true for Host IP headers ... so if your application uses
     standard WO Request headers to detect SSL or originating IP you have
     to use the adaptor.
 
     The WO itself has no SSL capability.

  -- you dont need Monitor or WoTaskd. Actually the lifebeat that wotaskd uses
     to determine that an application is running is really pathetic. This is
     because that one is running in its own thread, so not all hang-conditions
     are determined by wotaskd (for this to really work we developed some
     kind of watchdog within an WO Application, which can detect some deadlock
     situations inside the WO App and kill itself, so that the wotaskd can
     then restart it).

     Of course you can accomplish similar things using launchd on OSX (we've
     done that) or for Linux by an entry in /etc/inittab (respawn): Those will restart the
     App if the JVM ends (but not when the App deadlocks). Just like wotaskd
     does it.

  -- its even possible to create a self contained application which bundles
     the complete WO deployment frameworks. We have made such applications
     which do not require any WO deployment installation, but can just
     be started with a simple start-script, the only requirement is
     the necessary Java JVM. Calling this with launchd or
     init makes the simplest possible way to install a WO application.
     (if you are interested in a sample launchd plist ... I have one).

  Greets
     Ralf

> Hi Xandro,
> 
> You will rarely hear me say this, but direct connect might  be OK in this limited situation.  You won't have SSL or concurrent request handling.  If the app hangs or crashes the admin will need to restart it manually.  For a private, internal app used by 5 people, that can be acceptable.
> 
> 
> Chuck
> 
> 
> On Apr 28, 2011, at 12:14 PM, Xandro Maierleb wrote:
> 
> > Hello WebObjects-Programmers,
> > I'm developing a WO-Application, which is used to handle maintanance for a small company. About 5 Persons will work in furture with this application within the company throw intranet.
> > 
> > Is it really necessary to disable WODirectConnect an build an own Apache HTTP-Adaptor? Do I really need WOTaskDaemon and WOMonitor on this machine if only 5 Perons use this App? Because it's quiet easier for me and the admin in this company to run it with a bashscript directly, and call this Application with a local URL like: http://192.168.0.1:1234
> > 
> > Have I any disadvantages in my case with my solution? If I read and understood the Deployment-Confluence rightly, WOTaskDaemon helps to share the calls to one or more instances (if there are many calls to my application). But I've only a handfull.
> > 
> > Thanks a lot and wish you all the best from austria,
> > Xandro
> > -- 
> > GMX DSL Doppel-Flat ab 19,99 Euro/mtl.! Jetzt mit 
> > gratis Handy-Flat! http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/dsl
> 
> -- 
> Chuck Hill             Senior Consultant / VP Development
> 
> Come to WOWODC this July for unparalleled WO learning opportunities and real peer to peer problem solving!  Network, socialize, and enjoy a great cosmopolitan city.  See you there!  http://www.wocommunity.org/wowodc11/
> 



-- 
theCode AG 
HRB 78053, Amtsgericht Charlottenbg
USt-IdNr.: DE204114808
Vorstand: Ralf Liebenow, Peter Witzel
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Wolf von Jaduczynski
Oranienstr. 10-11, 10997 Berlin [×]
fon +49 30 617 897-0  fax -10
[email protected] http://www.theCo.de