Simon,
Another interesting thought is that the monitor should have a way for
plugins to tell runtime on whether to fail or not fail at all. I am not sure
i am clear, but as an example, this exception is thrown in
CompositeProcessor.read()
throw new ContributionReadException(
"Unexpected <interface> element found. It should appear inside a <service>
or <reference> element");
In this case, the runtime fails during contributionRead when it finds the
unexpected element in composite file. I think monitor should handle this and
allow the plugins to decide as to what to do. In that case there would be a
clearer distinction between admin and runtime.
regards
Hasan
On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 10:39 AM, Hasan Muhammad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> One more point is to make the CompositeBuilderMonitor a true plugin or an
> extension point. So that external implementations can define their own and
> use them without modifying tuscany code. As of now the only way i see to
> pass in our own monitor is in places like the code below where instead of
> null, we pass in our monitor. If there is another way, please let me know.
> *
> return new CompositeBuilderImpl(assemblyFactory, scaBindingFactory,
> intentAttachPointTypeFactory, interfaceContractMapper, domainPolicySets,
> null);
>
> *
> regards
>
> Hasan
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 9:58 AM, Hasan Muhammad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Hi Simon,
> >
> > Thank you for the good information. First up i am trying to verify
> > whether the schema validation works when we point to our schemas. Can you
> > let me know what is a simple error that i can introduce so that i can verify
> > this? I tried doing this to my composite file (In block red):
> >
> > <component name="MyServiceComponentNew">
> > <implementation.java
> > class="mysca.test.myservice.impl.MyServiceImpl"/>
> > *<binding.ws/>*
> > <property name="location" source="$newLocation"/>
> > <property name="year" source="$newYear"/>
> > </component>
> >
> > This resulted in the following exception, but i think this is part of
> > the validation done by artifact processor and would result even if we
> > comment out the schema validation.
> >
> > org.apache.tuscany.sca.contribution.service.ContributionReadException:
> > Unexpected <binding> element found. It should appear inside a <service> or
> > <reference> element
> > at
> > org.apache.tuscany.sca.assembly.xml.CompositeProcessor.read(CompositeProcessor.java:373)
> > at
> > org.apache.tuscany.sca.assembly.xml.CompositeProcessor.read(CompositeProcessor.java:75)
> > at
> > org.apache.tuscany.sca.contribution.processor.ExtensibleStAXArtifactProcessor.read(ExtensibleStAXArtifactProcessor.java:83)
> > at
> > org.apache.tuscany.sca.contribution.service.impl.ContributionServiceImpl.processReadPhase(ContributionServiceImpl.java:475)
> > at
> > org.apache.tuscany.sca.contribution.service.impl.ContributionServiceImpl.addContribution(ContributionServiceImpl.java:383)
> > at
> > org.apache.tuscany.sca.contribution.service.impl.ContributionServiceImpl.contribute(ContributionServiceImpl.java:202)
> > at
> > com.ibm.ws.soa.sca.runtime.impl.DomainCompositeHelper.addContribution(DomainCompositeHelper.java:75)
> > at
> > com.ibm.ws.soa.sca.runtime.impl.SCAContainerComponentImpl.startComposite(SCAContainerComponentImpl.java:235)
> > at
> > com.ibm.ws.soa.sca.admin.runtime.tuscany.SCATuscanyRuntimeHandlerImpl.startModule(SCATuscanyRuntimeHandlerImpl.java:125)
> > at
> > com.ibm.ws.soa.sca.admin.runtime.impl.SCARuntimeImpl.start(SCARuntimeImpl.java:349)
> > at
> > com.ibm.ws.soa.sca.admin.runtime.impl.SCARuntimeImpl.start(SCARuntimeImpl.java:446)
> > at
> > com.ibm.ws.runtime.component.CompositionUnitMgrImpl.start(CompositionUnitMgrImpl.java:331)
> > at
> > com.ibm.ws.runtime.component.CompositionUnitImpl.start(CompositionUnitImpl.java:126)
> > at
> > com.ibm.ws.runtime.component.CompositionUnitMgrImpl.start(CompositionUnitMgrImpl.java:281)
> > at
> > com.ibm.ws.runtime.component.CompositionUnitMgrImpl$CUInitializer.run(CompositionUnitMgrImpl.java:768)
> > at
> > com.ibm.wsspi.runtime.component.WsComponentImpl$_AsynchInitializer.run(WsComponentImpl.java:348)
> > at com.ibm.ws.util.ThreadPool$Worker.run(ThreadPool.java:1487)
> >
> >
> > regards
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 5:56 AM, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 4:33 PM, Hasan Muhammad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Currently, i see that we have various places where we can plug in
> > > > validation
> > > > monitoring. Some of the ones that i found are in the
> > > > ReallySmallRuntimeBuilder as shown below:
> > > >
> > > > public static CompositeBuilder
> > > createCompositeBuilder(AssemblyFactory
> > > > assemblyFactory,
> > > >
> > > SCABindingFactory
> > > > scaBindingFactory,
> > > >
> > > > IntentAttachPointTypeFactory intentAttachPointTypeFactory,
> > > >
> > > > InterfaceContractMapper interfaceContractMapper,
> > > >
> > > List<PolicySet>
> > > > domainPolicySets) {
> > > > return new CompositeBuilderImpl(assemblyFactory,
> > > scaBindingFactory,
> > > > intentAttachPointTypeFactory, interfaceContractMapper,
> > > domainPolicySets,
> > > > null);
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > public static DomainBuilder createDomainBuilder(AssemblyFactory
> > > > assemblyFactory,
> > > > SCABindingFactory scaBindingFactory,
> > > > IntentAttachPointTypeFactory
> > > intentAttachPointTypeFactory,
> > > > InterfaceContractMapper interfaceContractMapper,
> > > > List<PolicySet> domainPolicySets) {
> > > > return new DomainWireBuilderImpl(assemblyFactory,
> > > > scaBindingFactory,
> > > > intentAttachPointTypeFactory, interfaceContractMapper,
> > > domainPolicySets,
> > > > null);
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > Instead of passing null, we can pass in our own
> > > CompositeBuildMonitor. Are
> > > > these the only places where we need to do this? or are there other
> > > places
> > > > as
> > > > well?
> > > >
> > > > Hasan
> > > >
> > >
> > > Hi Hasan
> > >
> > > There are a few places that logically we need to be able to validate
> > > input
> > > and hence add monitors. The story is changing a little as we are
> > > moving
> > > toward the new "workspace" code for managing contributions but
> > > logically I
> > > would expect to be running validating on at least the following
> > >
> > > - Contribution processing
> > > - dependency (imports/exports) analysis
> > >
> > > [org.apache.tuscany.sca.workspace.builder.impl.ContributionDependencyBuilderImpl]
> > > - Composite read
> > > - schema compliance
> > >
> > > [org.apache.tuscany.sca.contribution.processor.DefaultValidatingXMLInputFactory
> > > - only appears to be initialized in ReallySmallRuntimeBuilder so need
> > > to
> > > look at this in context of workspace]
> > > - policy intent matching
> > > [org.apache.tuscany.sca.assembly.xml.CompositeDocumentProcessor]
> > > - extension availability [General artifact processor hierarchy]
> > > - Composite resolve
> > > - ensure that artifacts required by the composite are available
> > > [General
> > > artifact resolver hierarchy]
> > > - Composite build
> > > - ensure that the composite is valid and consistent, e.g. unique
> > > component names, valid reference targets etc.
> > > [org.apache.tuscany.sca.assembly.builder.impl.CompositeBuilderImpl]
> > >
> > > I've noted in the square brackets where this function currently is.
> > > Note
> > > also that I'm making no comment here about whether the construction of
> > > the
> > > in-memory composite model is for use purely for contribution
> > > processing or
> > > is going to activated and started in a runtime. This validation is
> > > appropriate in both cases although you may choose to use different
> > > monitors
> > > in the two cases.
> > >
> > > So what I suggest as a first step is that you go ahead and change
> > > ReallySmallRuntimeBuilder to plug a monitor into CompositeBuilderImpl
> > > to see
> > > how it works. We can work here to build a consistent view of
> > >
> > > - all the places a monitor is required
> > > - what should the plugin model for monitors be
> > > - the flow of control (monitors vs exceptions)
> > > - what extra features may be required, I18N etc.
> > >
> > > I'm going to try a few experiments too to familiarize myself with this
> > > a bit
> > > more.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > Simon
> > >
> >
> >
>
