Chris, On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 10:13 AM Christopher Schultz < ch...@christopherschultz.net> wrote:
> > On 11/1/18 12:06, Igal Sapir wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 7:39 AM André Warnier (tomcat) > > <a...@ice-sa.com> wrote: > > > >> On 01.11.2018 14:51, Christopher Schultz wrote: > >>> We assign each dev a number and each application a number. Each > >>> pair of dev+app yields an actual port number. This works great > >>> in development so nobody ever steps on anyone's toes. In other > >>> environments (test, prod, etc.) there is only ever one "dev > >>> number" and that's "the deployer". > <snip/> > > > > This new feature from BZ 61171 might make life easier for > > deployments of such setups: Add port offset attribute (portOffset?) > > to Server configuration > > https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61171 > > Yup. We don't happen to use that feature, but that's just because we > baked everything into our deployment scripts back in 2003. :) > Right, given the fact that it was only added to dev a few hours ago (r1845482) I don't expect anyone to be using it yet ;) I like your idea of `port = dev + app`. In development, I often find myself disabling the AJP and SHUTDOWN ports to avoid binding conflicts. In production, one of the organizations for which I provide support has about 200 different applications, with deployment scripts that sets the different ports and map the web server accordingly. Come 9.0.13 the new portOffset feature can make such deployment a little easier. Best, Igal
