Yeah, of course. Just create multiple configurations, one for each development group.
Has anyone been able to make this work?
In JBoss 3.0.6 I've set up two server configurations, and set them up to use different ports by following the instructions and using a copy of the docs/examples/binding-service/sample-bindings.xml, just renaming jboss0 and jboss1 to what I've called my instances under the server directory.
It appears to work, until it gets to the Jetty service, which does not pick up the new port numbers, and attempts to bind to the default ports. At this point it fails, because another server is already listening there.
I've been trying this too, both with Jetty & Tomcat... no success. Anyone, anyone?
As I am new to using JBoss, could someone point to the needed docs or articles that would guide me into setting up different configurations for JBoss.
I have also a team of developers and would like to have each of them able to start his own instance but not by installing one JBoss for each ..
But it doesn't work.
It doesn't work in 3.2RC4 either.
It just seems like Jetty ignores the BindingService, and gets its own configuration.
Note that the binding service isn't available by default in 3.2RC4, I had to compile it from source. Maybe this is an indication that someone has realised that it doesn't work?
Thnx ageejas1, works for me.
There was a problem with the sample bindings config xml file (in 3.2), which had the old service name for Jetty (was 'Jetty', now 'JBossWeb'), which caused SB mgr not to resolve and reconfigure the service. I fixed it in the 3.2 branch a few months ago.
As to why SB Mgr is not in 3.2 by default, I don't think there has been much demand for it. I for one would love to see it there. I will find out the feasibility of getting it in 3.2.x.
mike, can u attach the service-bindings.xml which u fixed for 3.2 in this forum.
this may be a little late, but here are my Eng.Notes from setting up multiple 3.0x and 3.2 servers with Eclipse - I use this config to model 2 J2EE services communicating with each other - the parameters are specific to our application, but the port changes cover enabling multiple servers.
• Create 2 JBOSS Servers (on one box) (updated for JBOSS 3.2)
o Trim down JBOSS implementation to remove services we are not using.
o Copy JBOSS imp ecsdev0 to ecsdevX where X = instance, 1, 2, etc. i.e. ecsdev2
o Change Ports in conf/jboss-service.xml
 Change 1099 to X1099 (or -1 to disable remote access) where X = instance
 Change WebService port from 8083 to X8083 where X = instance
 Change RMI port from 4444 to X4444 where X = instance
o Change Ports in deploy/jbossmq-service.xml (if used)
 Change OIL Server port from 8090 to X8090 where X = instance
 Change UIL Server port from 8091 to X8091 where X = instance
 Change UIL2 Server port from 8092 to X8092 where X = instance
 Change OIL2 Server port from 8093 to X8093 where X = instance
o Change Ports in jbossweb.sar/META-INF/jboss-service.xml (jbossweb-jetty.sar on 3.2)
 Change HTTP Port from 8080 to X8080 where X = instance
 Change HTTPS Port from 8443 to X8443 where X = instance
 Change AJP13 Port from 8009 to X8009 where X = instance
o Change the Ports in hsqldb-ds.xml
 Change Port 1701 to X1701 where X = instance
o Add 2 JBOSS instances to Eclipse (ECSDev1 and ECSDev2)
 Start args: ‘-c ecsdevX’ where x = instance
 VM Args: ‘-XX:MaxPermSize=128m -XX:NewSize=128m -ms256m -mx512m’
 Shutdown args: ‘-s localhost:X1099 –S’ where x = instance
 Optional Log File: (find server.log in log directory of instance)
Attached is a working 3.2.0 bindings file. The 'default' server is the default JBoss config.
I just found the sample-bindings.xml file almost by accident (I had already resolved to changing the port mappings in each instance "by hand").
Is it just me, or is that file a mess? looks like it would be a royal pain to manage with the embedded xsl and all..
Seems to me like just making all ports take an override with a system property (or, better yet, from an additional property file loaded on startup), like Jetty already is, would make configuring and managing it much easier.
I'm wondering if I should do that, or try to live with sample-bindings instead, and hearing about the reason why it was decided to do this way would help a lot. Haven't found anything about it in the docs I have, though.
Attached is a modified sample-bindings.xml for 3.0.7, including basic changes to support a clustered deployment (profile "all"). It still needs changes to support changing the partition (I read in another thread that changing the partition is problematic right now), and iiop-service.xml can not be bound to another port since its configuration is in jacorb.properties instead of the service.xml. iiop-service.xml can be safely disabled, though, unless you need CORBA support.
Attached is a modified sample-bindings.xml for 3.0.7, including basic changes to support a clustered deployment (profile "all"). It still needs changes to support changing the partition (I read in another thread that changing the partition is problematic right now), and iiop-service.xml can not be bound to another port since its configuration is in jacorb.properties instead of the service.xml. iiop-service.xml can be safely disabled, though, unless you need CORBA