Hi Laurent, according to the documentation in the config file for JMX/RMI ports it states that 2 or more JPPF components on the same machine must use distinct values for ports:
#------------------------------------------------------------------------------#
# JMX management port #
# default value is 11198; uncomment to specify a different value #
# 2 or more JPPF components on the same machine must use distinct values #
#------------------------------------------------------------------------------#
jppf.management.port = 12001
#------------------------------------------------------------------------------#
# Internal RMI port used by JMX management #
# default value is 12198; uncomment to specify a different value #
# 2 or more JPPF components on the same machine must use distinct values #
#------------------------------------------------------------------------------#
jppf.management.rmi.port = 13001
#------------------------------------------------------------------------------#
# path to the JPPF security policy file #
# comment out this entry to disable security on the node #
#------------------------------------------------------------------------------#
I have 2 nodes running on the same machine that uses this exactly as it is to launch our nodes.
When the nodes are launched, the first one gets the port value of 12001, and the second gets a value of 12002. My assumption is the the framework is auto incrementing the ports, and my assumption is that it's doing the same for the rmi port. Is this correct? Should I be dynamically assigning ports based on the number of nodes on the machine, as the comments state?
In fact when I look both node's information in the admin ui,
node 1:
jppf.discovery.enabled = false
jppf.management.port 12001
jppf.management.rmi.port 13001
jppf.server.host localhost
processing.threads 2
reconnect.max.time 900
node 2:
jppf.discovery.enabled = false
jppf.management.port 12002
jppf.management.rmi.port 13002
jppf.server.host localhost
processing.threads 2
reconnect.max.time 900
So this is just a documentation issue?
Thank you again very much