Multiple server instances on a single computer?
Saturday, 23 May 2015 · 6 messages · last reply 26 May 2015
FB
France Baril23 May 2015 00:24 #
Hi,
Is it possible to install BaseX instances on the same computer?
My goal is to be able to work on multiple client projects, each with their own server settings (ex. separate .basex files), dbs and .xqm without having to create a VM for each.
VMs are heavy to run on my laptop, and context switching takes time.
Thanks,
France
--
France Baril
Architecte documentaire / Documentation architect
france.baril at architextus.com
CG
Christian Grün23 May 2015 09:44 #
Hi France,
Yes, that's possible; in our own setups, it's quite a usual scenario. All you have to do is create a .basex file in a directory and start basexserver with a different port from this directory. The port can be changed in the .basex file, via system properties [1] or specified on command line via -p [2].
Best,
Christian
[1] http://docs.basex.org/wiki/Options
[2] http://docs.basex.org/wiki/Command-Line_Options#HTTP_Server
Quoted text · France Baril · 24 lines
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 10:23 PM, France Baril <france.baril at architextus.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Is it possible to install BaseX instances on the same computer? > > My goal is to be able to work on multiple client projects, each with their > own server settings (ex. separate .basex files), dbs and .xqm without having > to create a VM for each. > > VMs are heavy to run on my laptop, and context switching takes time. > > Thanks, > > France > > > > > > -- > France Baril > Architecte documentaire / Documentation architect > france.baril at architextus.com
FB
France Baril25 May 2015 22:49 #
It just works! Thank you!
JM
Johan Mörén26 May 2015 00:02 #
I have noticed that when using two different versions of BaseX in embedded mode, in two different applications on the same application server. Errors are logged about rewriting the .basex file. No exceptions are throw, just the message in the log appears. Is there a way to create a QueryProcessor without the need for these files to be created? If not, i think it would be a nice feature to add.
Regards,
Johan Mörén
Quoted text · France Baril · 4 lines
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 8:50 PM France Baril <france.baril at architextus.com> wrote: > It just works! Thank you! >
CG
Christian Grün26 May 2015 11:50 #
Hi Johan,
Quoted text · Johan Mörén · 5 lines
> I have noticed that when using two different versions of BaseX in embedded > mode, in two different applications on the same application server. Errors > are logged about rewriting the .basex file. No exceptions are throw, just > the message in the log appears. Is there a way to create a QueryProcessor > without the need for these files to be created?
Currently no. We could add another startup flag to prevent reading and writing the configuration files. However, I am curious: What do you think would be the major advantage if the file would be ignored?
Christian
JM
Johan Mörén26 May 2015 18:33 #
(sorry for duplicates, forgot to "reply to all")
Hi Christian
In our case, using BaseX as a pure XQueryProcessor with no interactions with a database, we could mix different versions of BaseX in different applications on our application-server (Apache Karaf) without having warnings in the log about incompatible options files. If we for instance run 7.8 in one application and 8.2 in another we get warnings from the 7.8 app about unrecognized options. And the 8.2 version might require an option that is not part of the 7.8 version that will trigger a warning about that. Both apps will then rewrite the file to match it's specification.
Today we fix this by upgrading all our applications to the same version since we are a bit concerned about the effects of multiple applications fighting over the same file.
For us the major advantage would be not having to do this upgrade of applications using an older version if we deploy a new/updated application using a newer version of BaseX.
I guess the way we use BaseX is not the most common way. But this would for sure help us a lot.
A suggestion for the future, with out knowing the implications, could be to split the QueryProcessor into two implementations where the first continue to be database aware and the other not. The later version would then behave more like the Saxon QueryProcessor. Having sensible default options and ability to override these on construction (in memory).
Regards,
Johan Mörén
Quoted text · Christian Grün · 18 lines
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Christian Grün <christian.gruen at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Johan, > > > I have noticed that when using two different versions of BaseX in > embedded > > mode, in two different applications on the same application server. > Errors > > are logged about rewriting the .basex file. No exceptions are throw, just > > the message in the log appears. Is there a way to create a QueryProcessor > > without the need for these files to be created? > > Currently no. We could add another startup flag to prevent reading and > writing the configuration files. However, I am curious: What do you > think would be the major advantage if the file would be ignored? > > Christian >
Written for BaseX 8.2. BaseX may have changed since: please check the current documentation.
⚡Generated with XQuery