Skip to content

minor edits; removed limitations note #236

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
May 2, 2018
Merged

minor edits; removed limitations note #236

merged 2 commits into from
May 2, 2018

Conversation

rosemarymarano
Copy link
Contributor

Minor edits, however, I removed this Note: In the technology preview release, only WebLogic Server configured clusters are supported by the operator, and the operator will scale up only to the number of Managed Servers that are already defined. Support for WebLogic Server dynamic clusters, and for scaling configured clusters to more servers than are defined, is planned for a future release.

@mriccell mriccell requested a review from lennyphan May 1, 2018 15:43
@@ -6,7 +6,6 @@ The operator provides the ability to scale WebLogic clusters by simply editing t

Scaling up or scaling down a WebLogic cluster provides increased reliability of customer applications as well as optimization of resource usage. In Kubernetes cloud environments, scaling WebLogic clusters involves scaling the corresponding pods in which WebLogic Managed Server instances are running. Because the operator manages the life cycle of a WebLogic domain, the operator exposes a REST API that allows an authorized actor to request scaling of a WebLogic cluster.

**Note:** In the technology preview release, only WebLogic Server configured clusters are supported by the operator, and the operator will scale up only to the number of Managed Servers that are already defined. Support for WebLogic Server dynamic clusters, and for scaling configured clusters to more servers than are defined, is planned for a future release.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are these changes going with the release that includes Dynamic cluster support? Dynamic cluster support is already merged to the 'develop' branch. If so, shouldn't we remove 'is planned for future release' and add more info about Dynamic cluster support?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I already removed this note in my edited version. See my comments above.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes Lenny we need more information about Dynamic clusters

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should we add the following at the top which describes WLS clusters?

WebLogic Server supports two types of clustering configurations, Configured and Dynamic clustering. Configured clusters are created by manually configuring each individual managed server instance. Dynamic clustering, introduced in WebLogic Server 12c, are clusters where the managed server configurations are based off of a single, shared template.  With Dynamic clusters, when additional server capacity is needed, a new server instance can be added to the cluster without having to manually configure them individually. Also, unlike Configured clusters, scaling up of dynamic clusters is not restricted to the set of servers defined cluster but can be increased based on runtime demands

More information how to create, configure, and use dynamic clusters in WebLogic Server can be found in Dynamic Clusters.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I've re-worded it a bit, as follows:
WebLogic Server supports two types of clustering configurations, configured and dynamic clustering. Configured clusters are created by manually configuring each individual Managed Server instance. In dynamic clusters, the Managed Server configurations are based off of a single, shared template.  With dynamic clusters, when additional server capacity is needed, new server instances can be added to the cluster without having to manually configure them individually. Also, unlike configured clusters, scaling up of dynamic clusters is not restricted to the set of servers defined in the cluster, but can be increased based on runtime demands
More information how to create, configure, and use dynamic clusters in WebLogic Server can be found in Dynamic Clusters.

Three questions for you:

  1. Can we change "are based off of" to "are generated from"
  2. I removed your reference to "introduced in WebLogic Server 12c" If you think it's important, then I can add it back in.
  3. This reference, "can be found in Dynamic Clusters" Is this a doc in the repo or a cross-reference to the WLS docs?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

  1. I think it's fine to change to "are generated from"
  2. I think it's fine to remove the reference to "introduced in WebLogic Server 12c"
  3. Sorry, in my doc, "Dynamic Clusters" is a link to https://docs.oracle.com/middleware/1221/wls/CLUST/dynamic_clusters.htm#CLUST678

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ok, I'll make those changes and add the link.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done.

@rjeberhard rjeberhard merged commit af313bb into develop May 2, 2018
@rosemarymarano rosemarymarano deleted the RMscaling branch May 2, 2018 17:19
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants