The distributed OSGi is (or is being) finalized. CXF has an implementation of it already (which will be the RI). I was thinking that the discovery mechanism could be used to discover remote endpoints so that remote containers can become a single "logical" container. Then the NMR could locate those remote NMR endpoints and use them if no local endpoint exist for a given service.
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 10:18 AM, Andrea Zoppello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Guilllaume, > > +1 If you plan to add to the smx4 SEDA Flow the features that let us to have > clustering, > loadbalancing and persistence this is goof for us. > > On OSGi side, i know something but i'm not really an expert, as i know > distributed osgi is soemthing not clearly defined at that time, i know there > are different approach, which would you plan to support?? > > Andrea > Guillaume Nodet ha scritto: >> >> I think persistence support was quite misleading in ServiceMix 3. The >> JMS flow can persist the messages, however, there is no guarantee of >> not loosing messages because no transaction is used at all. >> That said, there is a plan to bring back some equivalent of the JMS / >> JCA flow somehow. I have some ideas in mind for that: >> * based on some policy (yet to be determined, it could be because >> the user specified that a given endpoint has to have this QoS), >> automatically create a pair of transacted JMS endpoints (consumer / >> provider) to put between two endpoints. This would provide clustering >> / loadbalancing / persistence in a transactional way at some points in >> the flow. The remaining of the flow should be done in memory with the >> SEDA flow. I guess one limitation is that this works for clustering >> (where the same application is deployed onto multiple containers) but >> not for transparent remoting (where the application is split across >> multiple containers). >> * use distributed OSGi to discover remote endpoints and be able to >> leverage those. This would cover the remoting bits above. >> Those two ideas can be combined as I don't think there is any overlap >> between those. >> But any other ideas is welcome. >> >> >> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 12:01 PM, Andrea Zoppello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> We're evaluating to port our open source project, to support servicemix >>> 4. >>> >>> I think some things in servicemix 4 are great ( osgi support ), >>> enhancemetnt >>> to >>> servicemix-bean and so on. >>> >>> BTW i still have some doubt, about it. >>> >>> Mu main doubt, is about the concept of flow. >>> >>> As i understand servicemix 4 will support only seda flow ( am i wrong ?? >>> ) >>> and as i understand, the nmr implementation will not use activemq as >>> underline implementation, but it still only support jms style endpoint. >>> >>> My point is that with old servicemix all messages going through the nmr >>> was >>> persisted ( we've configured activemq to persist message ) and if the >>> system >>> go down and then is recovered my messages were there. Is this guaranteed >>> with servicemic 4??? Are the messages persisted?? >>> >>> This is a very important feature for us. >>> Any toughts??? >>> >>> Andrea >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > > -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet ------------------------ Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ ------------------------ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
