I agree we should address this. Tom -- could you file a bug?
For consistency, instead of an option I think this would be
a new command: create-instance-config.
Or we could have create-instance not treat this condition
as an error: if you run create-instance and specify a config
node then it could just update domain.xml and return success.
(possibly informing the user that the config has been updated
but the instance has not been created on the host -- if
we don't feel that is too wordy).
Joe
Tom Mueller wrote:
> For the offline/manual sync usage, where SSH is not setup between nodes,
> the method for creating a cluster would be this:
>
> create-node-config --nodehost h1 n-h1
> create-node-config --nodehost h2 n-h2
> create-cluster c1
> create-instance --cluster c1 --node n-h1 i1
> (command prints failure message)
> create-instance --cluster c1 --node n-h2 i2
> (command prints failure message)
> export-sync-bundle --target c1 --retrieve=true c1.zip
> (copy c1.zip to h1 and h2)
> on h1:
> import-sync-bundle --file c1.zip i1
> on h2:
> import-sync-bundle --file c1.zip i2
>
> At this point the instances can be started.
>
> What I'm wondering is whether we should have an option for
> create-instance, something like --dasonly or --offline, that would tell
> create-instance to only do the part of the work that is for the DAS
> because the expectation is to use manual sync later or an explicit
> create-local-instance later. This would allow the create-instance to
> succeed and print out the port assignments in this case.
>
> Currently, the create-instance fails, and it doesn't print out the port
> assignments.
>
> Thoughts?
> Tom
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: admin-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: admin-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>