Question: Can I build celix and bundles into a single binary library ?

[Gary M <ga...@oedata.com>]

Hi,

I've been lurking about the great celix project since its incubator days.
Great work !!

Now I have an opportunity to potentially use it in a production project.

I'd like to build celix and bundles as a single binary library that can be
called via NodeJs. Actually, an external library in Amazon lambda's NodeJs
(no difference to standalone NodeJs). The reason for the single binary is
to work around lambda's module load time causing high response latencies.

Any suggestions on how to proceed building celix and bundles into binary
lib ?

v/r
garyM

Re: Question: Can I build celix and bundles into a single binary library ?

[Pepijn Noltes <pe...@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 10:00 AM Gary M <ga...@oedata.com> wrote:

> Thanks Pepijn,
>
> I was hoping to find a more positive answer.. I liked the idea of OSGi
> interoperabilty with pre-existing java implementations. I was looking at
> the bundle cache mechanism along with the dependency facility. Instead of
> reading the bundle off a file system, I was thinking to have a bundle store
> embedded in an object file, sort of a fake bundle file system. Eventually,
> the cached images (code) would be shared memory.
>
> If this is a silly, ridiculous approach, please let me know. I won't be
> insulted.
>

No it is not a silly approach. It is interesting idea and I had a look at
C++ Micro Services  [1] [2] and I think it does exactly that. So attaching
bundle resources to a library instead of adding the library in a bundle
zip. So maybe C++ Micro Services is something for you? Note that it uses
 C++ instead of C. If I am correct it also support a static linking
approach.

An interesting approach, worth thinking about. So thanks  piquing my
interest :).


[1] https://github.com/CppMicroServices/CppMicroServices
[2]
http://cppmicroservices.org/doc_2_1/group__MicroServicesCMake.html#ga5a2706d9c7ac4e3eaa1189d15e0d3e21



>
> v/r
> gary
>
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Pepijn Noltes <pe...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Gary,
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 8:06 AM Gary M <ga...@oedata.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I've been lurking about the great celix project since its incubator
> days.
> > > Great work !!
> > >
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Now I have an opportunity to potentially use it in a production
> project.
> > >
> > > I'd like to build celix and bundles as a single binary library that can
> > be
> > > called via NodeJs. Actually, an external library in Amazon lambda's
> > NodeJs
> > > (no difference to standalone NodeJs). The reason for the single binary
> is
> > > to work around lambda's module load time causing high response
> latencies.
> > >
> > >
> > So if I understand correctly the problem is that when using the
> > libcelix_framework library (and as result libcelix_utils library) to load
> > celix bundles (e.g. zip files containing a MANIFEST and a (at least one)
> > shared library) is too slow. Certainly considering with the nature of
> > amazon lambda -> Function as as Service (FaaS).
> >
> > Although I would prefer to promote Celix as a good solution ;), I am not
> > sure if in this case this is true. For one the dynamic nature of Celix
> > (loading shared libraries on demand) already introduces overhead. But
> more
> > critical is that Celix creates bundle caches  (as is specified in the
> OSGi
> > specification) and this is probably a big part of the startup overhead.
> >
> >
> >
> > > Any suggestions on how to proceed building celix and bundles into
> binary
> > > lib ?
> > >
> >
> > The use of bundle caches and bundle revision is quite an integral part of
> > Celix and IMO it is not really feasible to remove this.
> >
> > I do think it is interesting to consider if you would be happy not using
> > the "complete" Celix solution but only service registry part. So the part
> > where you can runtime register, unregister, lookup and listen for
> services
> > and also listen for service listeners (listener hook).
> >
> > I am not saying this is currently possible, because it is not; the
> service
> > registry depends on the concept of bundles, but I do think it possible to
> > decouple that.. given enough effort.
> >
> > Hopefully that answer you question, if not please let us know.
> >
> > Greetings,
> > Pepijn
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > v/r
> > > garyM
> > >
> >
>

Re: Question: Can I build celix and bundles into a single binary library ?

[Gary M <ga...@oedata.com>]

Thanks Pepijn,

I was hoping to find a more positive answer.. I liked the idea of OSGi
interoperabilty with pre-existing java implementations. I was looking at
the bundle cache mechanism along with the dependency facility. Instead of
reading the bundle off a file system, I was thinking to have a bundle store
embedded in an object file, sort of a fake bundle file system. Eventually,
the cached images (code) would be shared memory.

If this is a silly, ridiculous approach, please let me know. I won't be
insulted.

v/r
gary

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Pepijn Noltes <pe...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Gary,
>
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 8:06 AM Gary M <ga...@oedata.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've been lurking about the great celix project since its incubator days.
> > Great work !!
> >
>
> Thanks
>
>
> >
> > Now I have an opportunity to potentially use it in a production project.
> >
> > I'd like to build celix and bundles as a single binary library that can
> be
> > called via NodeJs. Actually, an external library in Amazon lambda's
> NodeJs
> > (no difference to standalone NodeJs). The reason for the single binary is
> > to work around lambda's module load time causing high response latencies.
> >
> >
> So if I understand correctly the problem is that when using the
> libcelix_framework library (and as result libcelix_utils library) to load
> celix bundles (e.g. zip files containing a MANIFEST and a (at least one)
> shared library) is too slow. Certainly considering with the nature of
> amazon lambda -> Function as as Service (FaaS).
>
> Although I would prefer to promote Celix as a good solution ;), I am not
> sure if in this case this is true. For one the dynamic nature of Celix
> (loading shared libraries on demand) already introduces overhead. But more
> critical is that Celix creates bundle caches  (as is specified in the OSGi
> specification) and this is probably a big part of the startup overhead.
>
>
>
> > Any suggestions on how to proceed building celix and bundles into binary
> > lib ?
> >
>
> The use of bundle caches and bundle revision is quite an integral part of
> Celix and IMO it is not really feasible to remove this.
>
> I do think it is interesting to consider if you would be happy not using
> the "complete" Celix solution but only service registry part. So the part
> where you can runtime register, unregister, lookup and listen for services
> and also listen for service listeners (listener hook).
>
> I am not saying this is currently possible, because it is not; the service
> registry depends on the concept of bundles, but I do think it possible to
> decouple that.. given enough effort.
>
> Hopefully that answer you question, if not please let us know.
>
> Greetings,
> Pepijn
>
>
>
> >
> > v/r
> > garyM
> >
>

Re: Question: Can I build celix and bundles into a single binary library ?

[Pepijn Noltes <pe...@gmail.com>]

Hi Gary,

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 8:06 AM Gary M <ga...@oedata.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I've been lurking about the great celix project since its incubator days.
> Great work !!
>

Thanks


>
> Now I have an opportunity to potentially use it in a production project.
>
> I'd like to build celix and bundles as a single binary library that can be
> called via NodeJs. Actually, an external library in Amazon lambda's NodeJs
> (no difference to standalone NodeJs). The reason for the single binary is
> to work around lambda's module load time causing high response latencies.
>
>
So if I understand correctly the problem is that when using the
libcelix_framework library (and as result libcelix_utils library) to load
celix bundles (e.g. zip files containing a MANIFEST and a (at least one)
shared library) is too slow. Certainly considering with the nature of
amazon lambda -> Function as as Service (FaaS).

Although I would prefer to promote Celix as a good solution ;), I am not
sure if in this case this is true. For one the dynamic nature of Celix
(loading shared libraries on demand) already introduces overhead. But more
critical is that Celix creates bundle caches  (as is specified in the OSGi
specification) and this is probably a big part of the startup overhead.



> Any suggestions on how to proceed building celix and bundles into binary
> lib ?
>

The use of bundle caches and bundle revision is quite an integral part of
Celix and IMO it is not really feasible to remove this.

I do think it is interesting to consider if you would be happy not using
the "complete" Celix solution but only service registry part. So the part
where you can runtime register, unregister, lookup and listen for services
and also listen for service listeners (listener hook).

I am not saying this is currently possible, because it is not; the service
registry depends on the concept of bundles, but I do think it possible to
decouple that.. given enough effort.

Hopefully that answer you question, if not please let us know.

Greetings,
Pepijn



>
> v/r
> garyM
>