Inline...
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jul 16, 2018, at 6:34 AM, Raymond Auge <raymond.a...@liferay.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 6:16 AM, Philipp Höfler <
> philipp.hoef...@pernexas.com> wrote:
>
>> Hallo Ray,
>>
>> thanks for your detailed explanation. You're right, I think one can
>> consider this scenario as multi-tenant.
>> This sounds pretty promising.
>>
>> The following points are unclear to me:
>> * Even if I decouple the configuration from the endpoint, the security
>> check has to be done in the endpoint, as it depends on the function that is
>> invoked.
>> I've several classes / endpoints for handling different functions.
>> Basically, it is about the CRUD functions, but there are also some
>> additional ones.
>> Is it still possible to handle the security check based on the
>> configuration in the endpoint itself, but "route" the call to the right
>> instance of the endpoint based on the ID coming from the rest call?
>>
>
> First off let me answer your second bullet, the two interfaces I used were
> just "mock" types based on your example. The Endpoint is whatever you
> endpoint object was. The Tenant was just an object I made up which should
> encompass the instance of your configuration with which you can make
> security checks.
>
>
>> * I was trying to implement your suggestion, but I am facing problems.
>> What is Endpoint and Tenant for interfaces? Are they part of the JAX-RS
>> framework or osgi or are they custom interfaces?
>>
>
> See above, they are just pseudo code of your design.
>
>
>> * Can I still use endpoints with the annotations (@Path, @Get, etc)?
>>
>
> Yeah! this is what Endpoint was suppose to represent, again in pseudo code.
>
>
>> * You have a map of tenants in the endpoint A. How do you create and fill
>> these tenants? Is this done automagically be the factory configuration?
>>
>
> DS supports tuples of services (as in my example), and it's maintained for
> you. Then you have each "Tenant" created for you by configuration admin
> from a component that requires factory configuration, automagically ;)
>
Don’t you mean something like...
Specify the “Require” configuration policy for your DS tenant component. Then,
when a management agent creates a factory configuration for each tenant, DS
will create a corresponding instance of the tenant component.
?
Config admin isn’t going to create component instances for you. This is close
to nitpicking, but if you aren’t familiar with who does what even a little
imprecision can be very confusing, at least to me.
Thanks
David Jencks
> Sincerely,
> - Ray
>
>
>> Again, thanks for your help.
>> Philipp
>>
>>
>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: Raymond Auge <raymond.a...@liferay.com>
>> Gesendet: Freitag, 13. Juli 2018 16:01
>> An: felix users <users@felix.apache.org>
>> Betreff: Re: Configurator R7 example
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 4:37 AM, Philipp Höfler <
>> philipp.hoef...@pernexas.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I've tested the factory configuration and I am afraid that my problem
>>> is not being solved with this approach.
>>>
>>> I think I might have to explain the problem in more detail, that
>>> you'll get a better understanding.
>>> I am implementing a REST service using the HTTP Whiteboard mechanism.
>>> This interface is described in a quite old standard.
>>> Each call contains an identifier. I would like to configure my service
>>> based on this identifier.
>>> Meaning, depending on this identifier I would like to use different
>>> configuration.
>>>
>>> Example:
>>> I am receiving a call with identifier for S1 (System 1).
>>> {
>>> // Resource Format Version
>>> ":configurator:resource-version" : 1,
>>>
>>> // First Configuration
>>> "my.config~system1":
>>> {
>>> "test.securityEnabled": false,
>>> "test.test": false
>>> },
>>> // Second Configuration
>>> "my.config~system2":
>>> {
>>> "test.securityEnabled": true,
>>> "test.test": false
>>> }
>>> }
>>> }
>>>
>>> Then, I would like to disable the security when the call comes from
>>> System 1.
>>> But when the call comes from System 2 the security should be enabled.
>>>
>>> Maybe I am still misunderstanding the factory configuration.
>>>
>>
>> No I think you have understood it well. However I think what you need is
>> to break up the concerns a little.
>>
>> If if were me building your system, I would:
>>
>> - decouple the configuration from the rest endpoint. Let's call the
>> endpoint A and the configuration Tenants (because it sounds like you are
>> building a multi-tenant system):
>> @Component
>> class A implements Endpoint {
>> @Reference(
>> policy = ReferencePolicy.DYNAMIC,
>> policyOption = ReferencePolicyOption.GREEDY
>> )
>> private volatile Map<Map<String, Object>, Tenant> _tenants;
>>
>> String handleRequest(String tenantId) {
>> try {
>> Filter filter = FrameworkUtil.createFilter("(tenantId=" +
>> tenantId + ")");
>> return _tenants.entrySet().stream().filter(
>> e -> filter.matches(e.getKey())
>> ).map(
>> Map.Entry::getValue
>> ).findFirst().orElse("Not Found");
>> }
>> catch (InvalidSyntaxException e1) {
>> // ignore
>> }
>> return "Not Found";
>> }
>> }
>>
>> - create a component managed through factory configuration as above
>> @Component(
>> configurationPid = "my.config",
>> configurationPolicy = ConfigurationPolicy.REQUIRE
>> )
>> class TenantImpl implements Tenant {
>> private TenantConfig config;
>> @Activate
>> void activate(TenantConfig config) {
>> this.config = config;
>> }
>> }
>> this becomes a "service" for every factory configuration instance which
>> is then tracked by A
>>
>> Create new tenants as needed.
>>
>> I hope that illustrates the model a little better.
>>
>> - Ray
>>
>>
>>
>>> But according to my current understanding, osgi will create two rest
>>> endpoints for each configuration, right?
>>> When the rest call arrives, only one instance handles it, as the URL
>>> is the same.
>>> I do not know the identifier at compile time.
>>>
>>> To summarize:
>>> I basically want to load/use the config, based on a parameter coming
>>> with the request.
>>> If possible at all, I do not want to limit the amount of systems.
>>> Could you imagine any easy solution for that problem?
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>> Von: Raymond Auge <raymond.a...@liferay.com>
>>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 12. Juli 2018 18:23
>>> An: felix users <users@felix.apache.org>
>>> Betreff: Re: Configurator R7 example
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 11:58 AM, Philipp Höfler <
>>> philipp.hoef...@pernexas.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Right, this is missing.
>>>> I added the @RquireConfigurator annotation to the GoGo Command class.
>>>> Is that a suitable place for it?
>>>> The json is now being loaded. The value is set to false.
>>>>
>>>> Could you please explain, how this is working?
>>>>
>>> It's not completely clear to me, why the @interface MyConfig is
>>>> automatically used to hold the configuration.
>>>>
>>>
>>> DS is merely creating a proxy of the annotation type which fronts (or
>>> is backed by) the configuration dictionary, using the default values
>>> as well, default values if that particular property is not defined or
>>> if no configuration is available.
>>>
>>>
>>>> In each class, that needs access to the config I've a activate and
>>>> modified method with this signature: public void modified(MyConfig
>>>> config)
>>>>
>>>> Is the type resolved based on the pid and the param type of the method?
>>>>
>>>
>>> The Component Property Type will be backed by whatever configuration
>>> is associated with the component. so if you use the same Component
>>> Property Types on two different components which refer to two
>>> different pids, the proxies will show different values (based on the
>>> backing configuration dictionary of the component).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> Back to my root problem:
>>>> Is it now possible to have the following configuration?
>>>> {
>>>> // Resource Format Version
>>>> ":configurator:resource-version" : 1,
>>>>
>>>> // First Configuration
>>>> "my.config":
>>>> {
>>>> "system1":
>>>> {
>>>> "test.securityEnabled": false,
>>>> "test.test": false
>>>> },
>>>> "system2":
>>>> {
>>>> "test.securityEnabled": false,
>>>> "test.test": false
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sure in this case the configuration dictionary will hold values:
>>>
>>> system1 = {"test.securityEnabled": false, "test.test": false}
>>> system2 = {"test.securityEnabled": false, "test.test": false}
>>>
>>> which is probably not what you intended.
>>>
>>> IF what you want is to create N instances of the component, one per
>>> set of configuration properties, you'd want to use Factory
>> Configurations like so:
>>>
>>> {
>>>> // Resource Format Version
>>>> ":configurator:resource-version" : 1,
>>>>
>>>> // First Configuration
>>>> "my.config~system1":
>>>> {
>>>> "test.securityEnabled": false,
>>>> "test.test": false
>>>> },
>>>> // Second Configuration
>>>> "my.config~system2":
>>>> {
>>>> "test.securityEnabled": true,
>>>> "test.test": false
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>
>>> Then you will have 2 component activations; one for each system1,
>>> system2, each with a MyConfig instance backing a different factory
>>> configuration instance.
>>>
>>> HTH
>>> - Ray
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Is it possible to have such a config with n systems?
>>>> Meaning, I do not know the amount of systems at compile time.
>>>>
>>>> Further, how would the @interface MyConfig annotation look like?
>>>> Is it possible to expect an array of MyConfig for the
>>>> modified(MyConfig[]
>>>> configs) method?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for your help,
>>>> Philipp
>>>>
>>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>>> Von: Raymond Auge <raymond.a...@liferay.com>
>>>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 12. Juli 2018 16:43
>>>> An: felix users <users@felix.apache.org>
>>>> Betreff: Re: Configurator R7 example
>>>>
>>>> Did you add the requirement to your configuration bundle?
>>>>
>>>> Require-Capability: osgi.extender; \
>>>> filter:="(&(osgi.extender=osgi.configurator) \
>>>> (version>=1.0
>>>> <https://osgi.org/specification/osgi.cmpn/7.0.0/
>>>> service.configurator.html#org.osgi.service.configurator>)(!(
>>>> version>=2.0)))"
>>>>
>>>> That or on some bit of code in the configuration bundle add the
>>> annotation:
>>>>
>>>> @org.osgi.service.configurator.annotations.RequireConfigurator
>>>>
>>>> - Ray
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 10:23 AM, Philipp Höfler <
>>>> philipp.hoef...@pernexas.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hallo David,
>>>>>
>>>>> thanks for the explanation.
>>>>> So, the configurator is just a "wrapper" for the
>>>>> ConfigAdminService to read json and transfer it into a key value
>> format, right?
>>>>>
>>>>> I still have problems to use the
>>>>> I put a test.json file in the OSGI-INF/configurator folder of a
>>>>> bundle with the following content:
>>>>> {
>>>>> // Resource Format Version
>>>>> ":configurator:resource-version" : 1,
>>>>>
>>>>> // First Configuration
>>>>> "my.config":
>>>>> {
>>>>> "test.securityEnabled": false,
>>>>> "test.test": false
>>>>> }
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> In addition, I have an annotation for holding the values:
>>>>> public @interface MyConfig
>>>>> {
>>>>> boolean test_securityEnabled () default true;
>>>>> boolean test_test() default true; }
>>>>>
>>>>> Besides that, I've a custom GoGo command for configuration. But I
>>>>> am not sure, if this is really needed for loading the json?
>>>>>
>>>>> Unfortunately, the json is obviously not loaded.
>>>>> Both values are set to true, according to the default value.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do I have to do something in addition to load the json file?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Philipp
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>>>> Von: David Bosschaert <david.bosscha...@gmail.com>
>>>>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 12. Juli 2018 11:15
>>>>> An: users@felix.apache.org
>>>>> Betreff: Re: Configurator R7 example
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Philipp,
>>>>>
>>>>> In the end the configuration specified with the Configurator will
>>>>> end up in OSGi Configuration Admin, so the Configurator is limited
>>>>> to the same types as ConfigAdmin. The Configurator allows complex
>>>>> JSON values to be specified, they will end up as JSON text in
>>>>> Configuration Admin if they go beyond what ConfigAdmin supports
>>> natively.
>>>>>
>>>>> So to use the Configurator you need the Configurator bundle plus
>>>>> the ConfigAdmin bundle.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Configurator handles configuration resources in
>>>>> OSGI-INF/configurator inside bundles but can also be provided with
>>>>> external configuration via the configurator.initial
>>>>> framework/system property. This is described in sections 150.4 and
>>>>> 150.5 in [1]. To provide Configurator configuration into the
>>>>> system you don't need to write any classes, but depending on how
>>>>> you use the configuration you may have to add classes that consume
>>>>> it. But again, the consumption can be done by anything that
>>>>> understands ConfigAdmin configs, so there
>>>> are a lot of options for this.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not aware of a complete tutorial on this topic yet. I agree it
>>>>> would be nice to have that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hope this helps,
>>>>>
>>>>> David
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] https://osgi.org/specification/osgi.cmpn/7.0.0/
>>>>> service.configurator.html
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 12 Jul 2018 at 10:55, Philipp Höfler
>>>>> <philipp.hoef...@pernexas.com
>>>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am searching for a possibility to load complex configurations.
>>>>>> I tried the ConfigurationAdminService, but key value pairs are
>>>>>> not sufficient as I need complex types.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Raymond pointed out that I should have a look at the
>>>>>> Configurator Specification.
>>>>>> https://osgi.org/specification/osgi.cmpn/7.0.0/
>> service.configurator.
>>>>>> ht
>>>>>> ml
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I read the specification and it sounds promising.
>>>>>> But I am stuck how to use the Configuration in my project.
>>>>>> I understand that I've to add the following dependency.
>>>>>> org.apache.felix.configurator
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But I don't understand if I've to add some classes, where the
>>>>>> json file has to be placed and if it's possible to place it
>>>>>> outside of the
>>>>> bundle?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is there any tutorial or sample project out there?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Philipp
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> --
>>>>> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@felix.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@felix.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> *Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
>>>> (@rotty3000)
>>>> Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
>>>> (@Liferay)
>>>> Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org>
>>>> (@OSGiAlliance)
>>>>
>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@felix.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@felix.apache.org
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
>>> (@rotty3000)
>>> Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
>>> (@Liferay)
>>> Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org>
>>> (@OSGiAlliance)
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
>> (@rotty3000)
>> Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
>> (@Liferay)
>> Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org>
>> (@OSGiAlliance)
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@felix.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@felix.apache.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Raymond Augé* <http://www.liferay.com/web/raymond.auge/profile>
> (@rotty3000)
> Senior Software Architect *Liferay, Inc.* <http://www.liferay.com>
> (@Liferay)
> Board Member & EEG Co-Chair, OSGi Alliance <http://osgi.org> (@OSGiAlliance)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@felix.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@felix.apache.org
