>> You have competing requirements:
>>
>> 1. All servers are the same
>>
>2. Some subset users get a different version of the application
>>
>
>All servers would have all versions of the app, thats the whole point
>:)
>I.e.
>Instead of
>Server 1 - 3: App Version 001
>Server 4 - 6: App Version 002
>
>I would have
>Server 1-6: App Version 001 + 002
>
>Parallel deployment makes this possible and simple to use.
As far as I understand (and use it on a daily basis), parallel deployment
allows to upgrade a webapp to a new version with no downtime, new sessions
being handled by the newest version and existing ones beinig handled by the
version already handling them.
That the only case where I see parallel deployment using multiple versions. And
so I see no case where new sessions arr handled by two different versions.
So, it seems to me that // deployment is not a fit for your requirements.
I find them interesting anyway, as I would really like to be able to have a
finer control on the selection of the "current" version.
This would allow transparent downgrades, without removing or stopping a version
and help solve a stupid problem I had several times : // deployment sort
versions alphabetically. So, version 1.1.9 is prefered to 1.1.10, for
instance...
Ludovic
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
