Linda,
Looks good overall.
A few questions:
* Should more configuration defaults be standardized? Some of what is
now required could simply be defaulted. It could be problematic if some
of the values defaulted to "null" instead of an empty string.
* Should we standardize some default resources that an application
server must provide?
* Since JMS pluggability is not well defined, how portable is the
proposed JMS resource configuration really?
* The names <jms-resource>, <jms-admin-object> and <mail-resource> seem
overly abstract/ivory-tower-ish. Is there a reason for that - it might
confuse the average joe developer? Why not simply use
<jms-connection-factory>, <jms-destination> and <mail-session>?
Comments on your notes:
* What happens upon failure to satisfy the requested resources? Does the
application fail to deploy or is there run-time failure?
- There should be a deployment failure - basically the "fail fast"
principle.
* Should any of the following attributes be standardized, or should they
be left as properties?
- They should be standardized.
* Do we need any way to distinguish XA from non-XA if transactional?
- I don't think we do. If so, it should be a separate attribute.
* Should this creation be limited to cloud environments?
- No.
* What format should the specification of an application’s resource
configuration dependencies take, particularly when the application is
intended for multi-tenant Resource Configuration July 26, 2011 3:20 pm
11 use?
- Not sure I understand?
* What means should we use to indicate sharing of resources?
* We will need a means to specify which attributes of the resource
definition must be modified by a tenant, which attributes of the
resource definition must not be
modified when the application is deployed for a tenant, and which
attributes of the resource definition may be modified by a tenant.
- Probably just more attributes? Difficult to tell without actually
seeing the rest of the multi-tenancy features.
Hope it helps.
Cheers,
Reza
On 7/26/2011 6:42 PM, Linda DeMichiel wrote:
> One of our goals in this release is to provide improvements in
> resource configuration and resource "definition". The intention here
> is both to enable the deployment process to be further automated in
> PaaS environments and to facilitate ease-of-use.
>
> Resource definitions (for example, the DataSource definition
> introduced in Java EE 6), allow an application to be deployed into the
> cloud with more minimal administrative configuration, and can also
> serve as "templates" for modifications and/or extensions to meet the
> deployment requirements of additional tenants.
>
> The attached document is intended as a proposal for the first step in
> this process, and addresses standardization for the configuration of
> application-scoped resources that are required to be provided as
> part of the platform.
>
> We would appreciate if you would review this document in detail and
> post your feedback. There are a number of issues flagged in the text,
> including open issues that impact on the next steps that we would
> pursue in extending such configuration support to multiple tenants.
>
> thanks,
>
> -Linda
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG -www.avg.com
> Version: 10.0.1390 / Virus Database: 1518/3789 - Release Date: 07/26/11