My initial focus, was on just striping away the dependency on RMIClassLoaderSPI as the "only" way to change class loading behavior. The impetus, of course, was that Netbeans does not have a trivial way (let alone functional) way to specify a classpath change (required for the static initialization of RMIClassLoaderSPI) at startup, without reengineering netbeans itself. So, I decided that I wanted to just make it possible to completely avoid RMIClassLoaderSPI. The optimizations and odd calling paths that you mentioned, were things that I looked at, but felt it might be better to go ahead and get some feed back from everyone before working on all the changes and optimizations to do all of that.

However, I am sure that PreferredClassProvider really should not be a CodebaseClassAccess instance. There are two usage patterns at play here.

There is the service/client apps, who will assert some CodebaseClassAccess instance, and then there is downloaded code, which might use RMI, or which might otherwise call PreferredClassProvider.loadClass(). Those codebases also need to be affected by the assertion of a CodebaseClassAccess instance.

I don't remember the exact details of what I experienced when I was putting this together, but it seems like I experienced an unexpected call to PreferredClassProvider.loadClass().

Note, that my old changes to PreferredClassProvider, to provide deferred downloading based on "alwaysPreferred" classes, has been moved into my own implementation of CodebaseClassAccess et.al. I used to have lots of hooks into different parts of PreferredClassProvider, including loadClass(), so it may be that I'm speaking of past issues which don't exist any longer.

I need to drag all the Netbeans stuff back out and see where things stand it appears.

Gregg Wonderly

On 8/11/2012 7:05 PM, Peter Firmstone wrote:
Peter Firmstone wrote:
Just thought I'd get a little clarification on how CodebaseAccessClassLoader should work and whether it needs any further refinements or tweaks. I'm currently patching CodebaseAccessClassLoader back into the main trunk, so it can make the next release.

All references to RMIClassLoader static method calls (except for RMIClassLoader.getDefaultProviderInstance()) in the platform and supporting service implementations were replaced with equivalent method calls to CodebaseAccessClassLoader, I'm now going through the test kits, replacing all similar method calls.

The relationship between PreferredClassProvider, RMIClassLoader and CodebaseAccessClassLoader appear circular, so I'm finding it a little confusing how it should be applied in Netbeans or an OSGi environment.

Observations:

  1. CodebaseAccessClassLoader is the replacement for RMIClassLoader,
     it has identical static methods (except for
     getDefaultProviderInstance()) and three additional methods
     (identical to CodebaseClassAccess).
  2. CodebaseAccessClassLoader providers must implement the
     CodebaseClassAccess interface, which it delegates to.
  3. CodebaseAccessClassLoader has a static method to change the
     provider, guarded with a security check.
  4. CodebaseClassAccess has identical methods to RMIClassLoader
     (except for getDefaultProviderInstance()) and three additional
     methods:
        1. createClassLoader(URL[] urls, ClassLoader parentLoader,
           boolean requiredDlperm, AccessControlContext ctx)
        2. getParentContextClassLoader()
        3. getSystemContextLoader(ClassLoader defaultLoader).
  5. RMIClassLoaderCodebaseAccess is a wrapper around RMIClassLoader
     that implements CodebaseClassAccess
  6. RMIClassLoaderCodebaseAccess is the default provider for
     CodebaseAccessClassLoader
  7. PreferredClassProvider doesn't implement CodebaseClassAccess.
  8. PreferredClassProvider now calls CodebaseAccessClassLoader to get
     the context ClassLoader (which may now be something other than the
     call Thread's context ClassLoader) and also calls
     CodebaseAccessClassLoader.createClassLoader instead of creating a
     PreferredClassLoader directly.
  9. Call path CodebaseAccessClassLoader -->
     RMIClassLoaderCodebaseAccess --> RMIClassLoader -->
     PreferredClassProvider --> CodebaseAccessClassLoader -->
     RMIClassLoaderCodebaseAccess
 10. The interface CodebaseClassAccess includes deprecated methods from
     RMIClassLoader

A flaw with the original RMIClassLoaderSPI mechanism is you don't get a choice of provider, like you do for encryption or other providers, you get the first loaded provider. The ServiceProvider mechanism in Java 6 is more flexible than RMIClassLoaderSPI, allowing loading from child ClassLoaders, not just the system loader.

I understand and appreciate that Gregg has created this to allow development using Netbeans, a task which the code has proven successful, I also understand that Chris used it with OSGi. Lets make sure we get it right prior to release.


Some Questions:

Should CodebaseAccessClassLoader be used to replace RMIClassLoaderSPI?

Shouldn't PreferredClassProvider also implement CodebaseClassAccess? So it can be used directly as a provider without using RMIClassLoader or RMIClassLoaderCodebaseAccess?

Shouldn't PreferredClassProvider provide its own methods for creating ClassLoaders and finding the parent ClassLoader rather than relying on CodebaseAccessClassLoader, which might be delegating to a different provider.

Should we drop the deprecated RMIClassLoader methods?

My mistake, it doesn't contain any deprecated RMIClassLoader methods.


Should we have additional mechanisms for loading CodebaseAccessClassLoader providers other than the static setter method? Eg configuration or ServiceProvider?

Should we have more than one provider available?

Regards,

Peter.




Reply via email to