Hello,

Sorry for the late response, I was away last week.

Yes, I did some research on developing a Vertx subsystem for WildFly, which has the capabilities to configure Vertx options.

Now only one Vertx instance can be configured with the subsystem, and the Vertx instance can be referenced by other subsystems via the capability name.

I think one Vertx instance should be good enough to cover most cases unless there are demands for multiple instances.

@Brian, what should I do to move the wildfly-vertx-extension to wildfly-extras ? I am willing to do that shortly if applicable :) Thank you very much !

Best regards

On Tue, Aug 20, 2024 at 11:27 PM Brian Stansberry <brian.stansberry@redhat.com> wrote:

Lin Gao has done a lot in this area, so be sure to discuss with him:

https://github.com/gaol/wildfly-vertx-extension

This was something we'd discussed moving to wildfly-extras last year.

On Tue, Aug 20, 2024 at 8:05 AM Jason Lee <jasondlee@redhat.com> wrote:

(SmallRye) OpenTelemetry does use vert.x for its exporters, so there is definitely some overlap. I'm not sure what, if any, configuration options might be of interest there or what the implications of a shared vert.x instance might be off hand, but it certainly sounds like something worth investigating.

Jason Lee

Principal Software Engineer

Red Hat JBoss EAP

Java Champion

On Tue, Aug 20, 2024 at 3:02 AM Kabir Khan <kkhan@redhat.com> wrote:

Hi,

At the moment the SmallRye/MP Reactive Messaging integration just uses a default created vert.x.

I think otel uses vert.x too, probably in much the same way? Then there might be other subsystems in various feature packs.

It seems there is some desire to be able to configure the vert.x instance https://github.com/smallrye/smallrye-reactive-messaging/discussions/2725. Being able to configure vert.x is TBH something I've totally ignored.

I guess this would mean a Vert.X subsystem, which can optionally create a vert.x instance with the configured parameters. Does it make sense to create more than one instance in case subsystems have slightly different needs?

Then the reactive messaging subsystem can use that, if present (or perhaps this should be a configuration parameter in the reactive messaging subsystem). If not (or not configured to do so), it will use the default like it does today.

Thanks,

Kabir

_______________________________________________
wildfly-dev mailing list -- wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org
To unsubscribe send an email to wildfly-dev-leave@lists.jboss.org
Privacy Statement: https://www.redhat.com/en/about/privacy-policy
List Archives: https://lists.jboss.org/archives/list/wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org/message/CHUJ5GZSHXUSVZNXS3X32H7UQ4M64NKC/

_______________________________________________
wildfly-dev mailing list -- wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org
To unsubscribe send an email to wildfly-dev-leave@lists.jboss.org
Privacy Statement: https://www.redhat.com/en/about/privacy-policy
List Archives: https://lists.jboss.org/archives/list/wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org/message/LQAOJBNMKKKPE5VFU5DZUT52S7PKDC2Q/

--

Brian Stansberry

Principal Architect, Red Hat JBoss EAP

WildFly Project Lead

He/Him/His

--

Lin Gao
Senior Software Engineer
JBoss Sustaining Engineering Team