You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@thrift.apache.org by Marlene Marques <ma...@gmail.com> on 2011/02/14 14:05:55 UTC
Multiple interfaces handled by the same TServer
Hi,
Can I have more than one interface being served by the same TServer?
I'm using a TServerSocket and wanted to have more than one interface
being served in the same port.
I started to implement a TProcessor that has a processMap with the
methods of all the interfaces, but now I have a naming collision and
can no longer use this approach.
To get things going I had a prefix to the operations of each
interface, but that feels like a really bad hack.
I also went to change the generated code to have the prefix only in
the process map and the TMessage, but this is not a better hack, since
now I can't give my idl to someone to implement a client that works
with my service.
Thanks,
Marlene
Re: Multiple interfaces handled by the same TServer
Posted by Marlene Marques <ma...@gmail.com>.
Yes, in my particular case one port is required, because i'm building
a generic thrift proxy where multiples services will be registered
(don't know them at build time).
For now I went with this approach, and will probably need to integrate
this feature in some of the other languages. I'll send a patch when
this is ready.
I was just trying to figure out if it was a feature of interest or
someone had a better way to do it before I start to implement it
myself.
Thanks
Marlene
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 7:35 PM, Nevo Hed <nh...@bamboo-entertainment.com> wrote:
> Is the one port essential or is the desire just to run in a single thread?
>
>
> THRIFT-563 looks like a great idea, but requires mods to clients
>
> a few days ago I realized that I may need to use a similar solution soon,
> so I looked at TNonblockingServer (uses libevent)
>
> I figured one could create a server that can create multiple TNBS instances
> and link them to this server.
>
> This new server's 'serve' method would share a single eventBase_ (from
> libevent).
>
> Yes, I would have multiple ports, but a single threaded
>
> Did I miss anything?
>
> Thanks
> -Nevo
>
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Marlene Marques <ma...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I went through the issues in the project and found a ticket about
>> multiplexing services [1], that looks like one of my approaches. I was
>> curious why it wasn't committed. Is it for lack of support in other
>> languages or you think the feature isn't worthy.
>>
>> [1] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-563
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Tony Kinnis <tk...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > This is not exactly what you were looking for but as an alternative you
>> > can
>> > emulate this over HTTP by mapping your different services to URLs. Of
>> > course,
>> > you'll have additional overhead with HTTP but you can support many
>> > different
>> > services on a single server:port. I am currently doing this using Netty
>> > as my
>> > http server and it works very well.
>> >
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message ----
>> > From: Bryan Duxbury <br...@rapleaf.com>
>> > To: user@thrift.apache.org
>> > Sent: Mon, February 14, 2011 8:25:39 AM
>> > Subject: Re: Multiple interfaces handled by the same TServer
>> >
>> > There's currently no clean way to do this. A while back, there were some
>> > proposals on how we could support this directly, but they did not get
>> > fully
>> > implemented. I think it was James King and his "channels" proposal that
>> > you
>> > might want to look for in the mailing list archive.
>> >
>> > On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 5:05 AM, Marlene Marques
>> > <ma...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> Can I have more than one interface being served by the same TServer?
>> >>
>> >> I'm using a TServerSocket and wanted to have more than one interface
>> >> being served in the same port.
>> >> I started to implement a TProcessor that has a processMap with the
>> >> methods of all the interfaces, but now I have a naming collision and
>> >> can no longer use this approach.
>> >>
>> >> To get things going I had a prefix to the operations of each
>> >> interface, but that feels like a really bad hack.
>> >> I also went to change the generated code to have the prefix only in
>> >> the process map and the TMessage, but this is not a better hack, since
>> >> now I can't give my idl to someone to implement a client that works
>> >> with my service.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >>
>> >> Marlene
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>
>
>
> --
> Nevo Hed
>
> nhed@bamboo-entertainment.com
> 617-302-6175
>
>
Re: Multiple interfaces handled by the same TServer
Posted by Nevo Hed <nh...@bamboo-entertainment.com>.
*Is the one port essential or is the desire just to run in a single thread?
*
THRIFT-563 looks like a great idea, but requires mods to clients
a few days ago I realized that I may need to use a similar solution soon,
so I looked at TNonblockingServer (uses libevent)
I figured one could create a server that can create multiple TNBS instances
and link them to this server.
This new server's 'serve' method would share a single eventBase_ (from
libevent).
Yes, I would have multiple ports, but a single threaded
Did I miss anything?
Thanks
-Nevo
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Marlene Marques
<ma...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I went through the issues in the project and found a ticket about
> multiplexing services [1], that looks like one of my approaches. I was
> curious why it wasn't committed. Is it for lack of support in other
> languages or you think the feature isn't worthy.
>
> [1] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-563
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Tony Kinnis <tk...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > This is not exactly what you were looking for but as an alternative you
> can
> > emulate this over HTTP by mapping your different services to URLs. Of
> course,
> > you'll have additional overhead with HTTP but you can support many
> different
> > services on a single server:port. I am currently doing this using Netty
> as my
> > http server and it works very well.
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Bryan Duxbury <br...@rapleaf.com>
> > To: user@thrift.apache.org
> > Sent: Mon, February 14, 2011 8:25:39 AM
> > Subject: Re: Multiple interfaces handled by the same TServer
> >
> > There's currently no clean way to do this. A while back, there were some
> > proposals on how we could support this directly, but they did not get
> fully
> > implemented. I think it was James King and his "channels" proposal that
> you
> > might want to look for in the mailing list archive.
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 5:05 AM, Marlene Marques
> > <ma...@gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Can I have more than one interface being served by the same TServer?
> >>
> >> I'm using a TServerSocket and wanted to have more than one interface
> >> being served in the same port.
> >> I started to implement a TProcessor that has a processMap with the
> >> methods of all the interfaces, but now I have a naming collision and
> >> can no longer use this approach.
> >>
> >> To get things going I had a prefix to the operations of each
> >> interface, but that feels like a really bad hack.
> >> I also went to change the generated code to have the prefix only in
> >> the process map and the TMessage, but this is not a better hack, since
> >> now I can't give my idl to someone to implement a client that works
> >> with my service.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Marlene
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
--
Nevo Hed
nhed@bamboo-entertainment.com
617-302-6175
Re: Multiple interfaces handled by the same TServer
Posted by Marlene Marques <ma...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
I went through the issues in the project and found a ticket about
multiplexing services [1], that looks like one of my approaches. I was
curious why it wasn't committed. Is it for lack of support in other
languages or you think the feature isn't worthy.
[1] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-563
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Tony Kinnis <tk...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> This is not exactly what you were looking for but as an alternative you can
> emulate this over HTTP by mapping your different services to URLs. Of course,
> you'll have additional overhead with HTTP but you can support many different
> services on a single server:port. I am currently doing this using Netty as my
> http server and it works very well.
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Bryan Duxbury <br...@rapleaf.com>
> To: user@thrift.apache.org
> Sent: Mon, February 14, 2011 8:25:39 AM
> Subject: Re: Multiple interfaces handled by the same TServer
>
> There's currently no clean way to do this. A while back, there were some
> proposals on how we could support this directly, but they did not get fully
> implemented. I think it was James King and his "channels" proposal that you
> might want to look for in the mailing list archive.
>
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 5:05 AM, Marlene Marques
> <ma...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Can I have more than one interface being served by the same TServer?
>>
>> I'm using a TServerSocket and wanted to have more than one interface
>> being served in the same port.
>> I started to implement a TProcessor that has a processMap with the
>> methods of all the interfaces, but now I have a naming collision and
>> can no longer use this approach.
>>
>> To get things going I had a prefix to the operations of each
>> interface, but that feels like a really bad hack.
>> I also went to change the generated code to have the prefix only in
>> the process map and the TMessage, but this is not a better hack, since
>> now I can't give my idl to someone to implement a client that works
>> with my service.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Marlene
>>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: Multiple interfaces handled by the same TServer
Posted by Tony Kinnis <tk...@yahoo.com>.
This is not exactly what you were looking for but as an alternative you can
emulate this over HTTP by mapping your different services to URLs. Of course,
you'll have additional overhead with HTTP but you can support many different
services on a single server:port. I am currently doing this using Netty as my
http server and it works very well.
----- Original Message ----
From: Bryan Duxbury <br...@rapleaf.com>
To: user@thrift.apache.org
Sent: Mon, February 14, 2011 8:25:39 AM
Subject: Re: Multiple interfaces handled by the same TServer
There's currently no clean way to do this. A while back, there were some
proposals on how we could support this directly, but they did not get fully
implemented. I think it was James King and his "channels" proposal that you
might want to look for in the mailing list archive.
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 5:05 AM, Marlene Marques
<ma...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Can I have more than one interface being served by the same TServer?
>
> I'm using a TServerSocket and wanted to have more than one interface
> being served in the same port.
> I started to implement a TProcessor that has a processMap with the
> methods of all the interfaces, but now I have a naming collision and
> can no longer use this approach.
>
> To get things going I had a prefix to the operations of each
> interface, but that feels like a really bad hack.
> I also went to change the generated code to have the prefix only in
> the process map and the TMessage, but this is not a better hack, since
> now I can't give my idl to someone to implement a client that works
> with my service.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Marlene
>
Re: Multiple interfaces handled by the same TServer
Posted by Bryan Duxbury <br...@rapleaf.com>.
There's currently no clean way to do this. A while back, there were some
proposals on how we could support this directly, but they did not get fully
implemented. I think it was James King and his "channels" proposal that you
might want to look for in the mailing list archive.
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 5:05 AM, Marlene Marques
<ma...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Can I have more than one interface being served by the same TServer?
>
> I'm using a TServerSocket and wanted to have more than one interface
> being served in the same port.
> I started to implement a TProcessor that has a processMap with the
> methods of all the interfaces, but now I have a naming collision and
> can no longer use this approach.
>
> To get things going I had a prefix to the operations of each
> interface, but that feels like a really bad hack.
> I also went to change the generated code to have the prefix only in
> the process map and the TMessage, but this is not a better hack, since
> now I can't give my idl to someone to implement a client that works
> with my service.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Marlene
>