Hi Jerry,

Most probably, each JSPWiki instance is running with the cache enabled,
with its default values, and that's why they don't "see" the changes made
by the other instance.

One option is to provide a custom ehcache file which shared the cache with
the other instance. IIRC, that kind of setups require to enable multicast
ports to run, but you'd better check ehcache docs for that. If you're
running 2.11.1 or later you can pass a property on your
jspwiki[-custom].properties file with the file's location on classpath. If
you're below that version you'll have to do some wear surgery and edit the
ehcache file.

Another option could be disabling the cache, but that will impact your
performance. Depending on the setup and your requirements, the resulting
performance might be enough for you.

Last thing that comes to mind involves a more complex setup around your
JSPWiki instances: don't share the wiki files folder and put some balancer
in front of the instances (Apache web server, Nginx, etc.). Configure it so
that when a post request arrives, it is sent to both instances, so they
keep in sync. When you receive a get, just forward it to whatever instance
you see fit.


HTH,
juan pablo

El sáb., 5 mar. 2022 20:02, Jerry Malcolm <techst...@malcolms.com> escribió:

> I have an environment on Amazon Web Services with 2 EC2s hosting 2
> different domains.  I have a separate common EFS (Elastic File System)
> drive that is mounted to both EC2s that holds the wiki pages.
>
> My objective is to share the same wiki on both domains.  But when I
> update the wiki on one domain, the changes don't show up on the other
> domain.  The updates are present in the 'pages' folder on the 2nd wiki.
> But I can't get the wiki to refresh and pick up the changes.  I have to
> reboot tomcat on the 2nd server in order to pick up the wiki changes.
> Is there anything I can configure or do in the 2nd wiki to force it to
> refresh from the repository and pick up the latest changes short of a
> Tomcat or Wiki restart?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Jerry
>
>

Reply via email to