[jboss-as7-dev] Subsystem specific deployer configurations in standalone.xml/domain.xml

[Thomas Diesler]

Hi Brian,

wanted touch base with you on this - any news?

cheers
--thomas

On 10/15/2012 11:45 PM, Brian Stansberry wrote:
> I've been working $subject in order to help support Thomas Diesler's
> request for AS7-3694[1]. The gist of this request is to add deployment
> unit processing (DUP) configuration as children of the deployment
> resource itself. Thomas' OSGi use case is one place where this would be
> used. I expect HASingleton deployment will be another.
>
> WIP is at [2]. I'm looking for feedback. :)
>
> What I've done is based on what Thomas did at [3]. What I want to do is
> move from the generic key/value pairs in that patch to a more formally
> describable management API. Instead of:
>
> <deployment name="foo.war"...>
>    <properties>
>     <property name="start.policy" value="DEFERRED"/>
>    <property>
> </deployment>
>
> It would be something analogous to how a profile configuration is done:
>
> <deployment name="foo.war"...>
>    <deployment-subsystem xmlns="urn:jboss:domain:osgi:1.2">
>      <start-policy value="deferred"/>
>    </deployment>
> </deployment>
>
> The existing Extension API already has the hooks to support this.
> Extensions can register xml parsers for children of the <deployment>
> element and can register management resources to act as children of the
> /deployment=foo.war resource as well. Several subsystems already take
> advantage of the latter. Until now the former has been an unimplemented
> API. The commit at [4] implements it.
>
> A couple things giving me some concern:
>
> 1) The above xml:
>
> <deployment-subsystem xmlns="urn:jboss:domain:osgi:1.2">
>
> Nicer would be something like:
>
> <deployers>
>     <subsystem xmlns="urn:jboss:domain:osgi:1.2">
>
> I need to figure out if I can do some tricks with the parsing to allow
> that to happen.
>
> 2) The structure of the resource tree. We already support resources like
> this:
>
> /deployment=foo.war/subsystem=web
>
> Subsystems register resources like those to expose metrics. The commit
> at [4] uses that same tree. When subsystems could now register child
> resources to the deployment=* resource, they could include both runtime
> stuff and configuration stuff.
>
> I'm not sure that mixing the two is ideal, although it's what we do for
> the regular subsystem resources in the profile. I'm vaguely concerned
> that if someday the configuration that subsystems choose to expose via
> this mechanism gets complex, the mixing of metrics with configuration in
> the same tree will start to break down.
>
> Comments are appreciated.
>
>
> [1] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AS7-3694
> [2] https://github.com/bstansberry/jboss-as/commits/AS7-3694
> [3] https://github.com/jbossas/jboss-as/pull/3230
> [4]
> https://github.com/bstansberry/jboss-as/commit/6326003a104ac4ac825e8dda4c557cfefe9cdcfd

-- 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thomas Diesler
JBoss OSGi Lead
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx