[wildfly-dev] Batch Subsystem Changes

[James R. Perkins]

On 07/07/2015 04:10 AM, Darran Lofthouse wrote:
> Related to that - how does this fit with capabilities and requirements?
>    Could other subsystems register their own job repository or does this
> all need to happen within the batch subsystem?
That's an interesting idea I hadn't thought of. It should work though as 
I am using a dynamic capability for the job repository.
>
> On 07/07/15 03:31, Cheng Fang wrote:
>> How does it support adding new types of job repository (e.g., infinispan
>> job repository) in the future?
>>
>> Cheng
>>
>> On 7/6/15 3:13 PM, James R. Perkins wrote:
>>> Hello All,
>>> The past couple weeks I've been working on basically a redo of the batch
>>> subsystem. Almost the entire management model is changing to hopefully
>>> make it more user friendly.
>>>
>>> In WildFly 8 and WildFly 9 the model looked like the following:
>>>
>>> {
>>>         "job-repository-type" => "in-memory",
>>>         "job-repository" => {"jdbc" => {"jndi-name" => undefined}},
>>>         "thread-factory" => undefined,
>>>         "thread-pool" => {"batch" => {
>>>             "keepalive-time" => {
>>>                 "time" => 30L,
>>>                 "unit" => "SECONDS"
>>>             },
>>>             "max-threads" => 10,
>>>             "name" => "batch",
>>>             "thread-factory" => undefined
>>>         }}
>>> }
>>>
>>> The job-repository-type could either be jdcb or in-memory. The jndi-name
>>> attribute on the single job-repository=jdbc resource could be undefined
>>> indicating the default data-source should be used or JNDI name to look
>>> up the data-source with no validation being done until the user actually
>>> tries to deploy a batch deployment.
>>>
>>> The thread-pool and thread-factory are the same as other resources that
>>> use the thread "subsystem" shared resources.
>>>
>>> As you can see it's not very intuitive and somewhat clumsy to say the
>>> least. Only a single job-repository could be defined which isn't great
>>> for multiple deployments.
>>>
>>> In WildFly 10 the model, at least currently, will look like:
>>>
>>> {
>>>         "default-job-repository" => "default",
>>>         "in-memory-job-repository" => {"default" => {}},
>>>         "jdbc-job-repository" => {"jdbc" => {"data-source" => "ExampleDS"}},
>>>         "thread-factory" => undefined,
>>>         "thread-pool" => {"batch" => {
>>>             "active-count" => 0,
>>>             "completed-task-count" => 0L,
>>>             "current-thread-count" => 0,
>>>             "keepalive-time" => {
>>>                 "time" => 30L,
>>>                 "unit" => "SECONDS"
>>>             },
>>>             "largest-thread-count" => 0,
>>>             "max-threads" => 10,
>>>             "name" => "batch",
>>>             "queue-size" => 0,
>>>             "rejected-count" => 0,
>>>             "task-count" => 0L,
>>>             "thread-factory" => undefined
>>>         }}
>>> }
>>>
>>> The default-job-repository will be an attribute similar to the previous
>>> job-repository attribute. The difference being you can use any named
>>> in-memory-job-repository or jdbc-job-repository. You can have any number
>>> of in-memory or JDBC job repositories.
>>>
>>> The data-source attribute value on a jdbc-job-repository resource will
>>> use the org.wildfly.data-source [1]. The name of the data-source is used
>>> instead of the JNDI which is a much cleaner approach.
>>>
>>> The thread-factory may be removed and the thread-pool may be changed to
>>> use attribute groups (once I figure out how to use them :)).
>>>
>>> As part of this I considered changing the name from batch to
>>> batch-jberet. The main concern I had with this was the web console, but
>>> I seem to have broken that anyway with the changes to the model. Does
>>> anyone have opinions on a name change to batch-jberet?
>>>
>>> Also parsing an old configuration may have some issues if the user was
>>> using a JDBC job repository. I've currently not found a good way to find
>>> a data-source resource name based on a JNDI name. I'm not sure if we
>>> should just fail when adding a legacy JDBC job repository. Any
>>> suggestions here would be helpful.
>>>
>>> Any comments or concerns in general are welcome. This is our chance to
>>> get it right this time.
>>>
>>>
>>> [1]: https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly/pull/7682
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> wildfly-dev mailing list
>> wildfly-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
>>
> _______________________________________________
> wildfly-dev mailing list
> wildfly-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev

-- 
James R. Perkins
JBoss by Red Hat