Home » Eclipse Projects » Equinox » equinox on the server-side 
| equinox on the server-side [message #55564] | 
Sun, 01 January 2006 17:14   | 
 
Eclipse User  | 
 | 
 | 
   | 
 
hello all, 
 
can somebody give me advises for the usage of one of the following 3 approaches of server-side equinox: 
 
1.) org.eclipse.help.appserver + org.eclipse.tomcat (for Eclipse Help Center) 
 - the eclipse built-in webserver 
 - why has IBM launched a second osgi-bundled web-server (see 3.). Is the new IBM solution more flexible? and if, in which ways?  
 
2.) org.eclipse.equinox.servlet.bridge, org.eclipse.equinox.servlet.ext and org.eclipse.equinox.servlet.httpservice (Simon Kaegi, Cognos): 
 - this solution I have confronted with so far 
 - possibility to integrate into tomcat, to build up a component oriented web application -> Is there an alternative solution? 
 
3.) org.eclipse.equinox.http (IBM): 
 - so far I haven`t analyzed 
 - seems to be something like 1.) 
 - has it's own servlet engine 
 - has NO Ext.-Points 
 - is there a documentation for usage? 
 
thank you and I wish all a happy new year!  
martin
 |  
 |  
  |   |  
| Re: equinox on the server-side [message #56623 is a reply to message #56571] | 
Thu, 12 January 2006 08:41    | 
 
Eclipse User  | 
 | 
 | 
   | 
 
Eishay, 
 
I still try to find out the main differences: 
 
> > can somebody give me advises for the usage of one 
> of the following 3 approaches of server-side equinox: 
> >  
> > 1.) org.eclipse.help.appserver + org.eclipse.tomcat 
> (for Eclipse Help Center) 
> >  - the eclipse built-in webserver 
> >  - why has IBM launched a second osgi-bundled 
> web-server (see 3.). Is the new IBM solution more 
> flexible? and if, in which ways?  
 
help webapps are registered as extension to the ext.-point org.eclipse.help.base.webapp. 
 
it can be used for own implementations through the WebappManager: http://www.eclipsezone.com/eclipse/forums/m91945034.html 
 
maybe it will soon be replaced by the IBM impl, but I don't know. 
 
> >  
> > 2.) org.eclipse.equinox.servlet.bridge, 
> org.eclipse.equinox.servlet.ext and 
> org.eclipse.equinox.servlet.httpservice (Simon Kaegi, 
> Cognos): 
> >  - this solution I have confronted with so far 
> >  - possibility to integrate into tomcat, to build 
> up a component oriented web application -> Is there 
> an alternative solution? 
 
my main investigations are targeted to it: 
seem to be suitable for a productive usage. 
 
Without changin a running web app server you can embed an osgi framework within a webapplication. All requests are directed to servlet-bundles through ONE central BRIDGE servlet. 
 
An alternative was Vasily Kuznetsov with his solution ( http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/equinox-dev/msg00693.ht ml). But he wants to adopt Simon Kaegis solution. 
 
> >  
> > 3.) org.eclipse.equinox.http (IBM): 
> >  - so far I haven`t analyzed 
> >  - seems to be something like 1.) 
> >  - has it's own servlet engine 
> >  - has NO Ext.-Points 
> >  - is there a documentation for usage? 
it is definitely a httpService with an integrated proprietary servlet engine. 
 
this concept, that an app server is bundled in one or more jars is like: 
 - Jetty in OSCAR 
 - a proprietary servlet engine in knopflerfish 
 - tomcat in eclipse 
 - ServiceTango 
 - distributing Geronimo in several osgi bundles:  http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@geronimo.apache.org/msg10923 .html 
 
The registration occurs through an httpService or an extension, but mostly httpService. In effect it's almost the same. 
 
short explanation: http://www.eclipsezone.com/eclipse/forums/m91979648.html. 
 
4.) your idea (within OHF) of implementing ONE CENTRAL osgi container within geronimo to manage osgi bundles (packaged as GBeans), which can communicate with elements of other containers (while simon kaegis approach is ONE osgi framework for each web app). this is one container beside an ejb, servlet and spring container. 
 
what do you think about these approaches? 
 
regards 
martin
 |  
 |  
  |  
| Re: equinox on the server-side [message #56705 is a reply to message #56623] | 
Thu, 12 January 2006 19:29    | 
 
Eclipse User  | 
 | 
 | 
   | 
 
Originally posted by: eishays.us.ibm.com 
 
Lets be a bit more abstract. 
The options I see are: 
 
1. RCP contains Web container: Run a web container from within an RCP  
and redirect events (e.g. SOAP) to resource bundles. 
2. Application server contains OSGi Bundles: App Server (e.g. Geronimo)  
contains OSGi bundles and make them accessible to internal components.  
In Geronimo case it might be servlets, EJBs, Spring etc. It might do it  
in two ways: 
2.1. The application server contains the OSGi environment (e.g. a GBean  
will contain am OSGi runtime and this will contain lots of bundles) 
2.2 OSGi is the base of the application server, i.e. the application  
server is an RCP (with no UI of course). In the Geronimo case it might  
be that each GBean is an OSGi bundle. 
 
Option (1) is good if you ride the Web Services / SOA hipe or want to do  
something in small scale. Not sure its a good thing if you like to have  
your bundles embedded in a rich server environment. Still, its the  
easiest one to do now, and lots of time you do want to do things in  
small scale. 
I don't think the eclipse organization is going to stimulate any real  
core server activity. The C in RCP stands for client and I don't see any  
signs it will change. 
 
Option (2) will enable your bundles to interact with a rich server  
environment, will be more scalable, but it doesn't have no support now,  
though there are good signs (see the discussions I and others started in  
the Geronimo list). 
(2.1) is depending on the OSGi developer to figure out how to do. It's  
probably easier to implement with the great improvements in Equinox, and  
the solution can be ported to other App servers. 
(2.2) should come from the App server developers, since you don't want  
to have your own "special hacked" server. I think that is the best  
option and that it will eventually happen. The problem is that the  
various App server teams will not necessarily choose the same OSGi  
framework (see Apache Felix). 
 
Do you this its the right categorization of options? 
 
Eishay 
 
 
Martin Schikowski wrote: 
> Eishay, 
>  
> I still try to find out the main differences: 
>  
>>> can somebody give me advises for the usage of one 
>> of the following 3 approaches of server-side equinox: 
>>> 1.) org.eclipse.help.appserver + org.eclipse.tomcat 
>> (for Eclipse Help Center) 
>>>  - the eclipse built-in webserver 
>>>  - why has IBM launched a second osgi-bundled 
>> web-server (see 3.). Is the new IBM solution more 
>> flexible? and if, in which ways?  
>  
> help webapps are registered as extension to the ext.-point org.eclipse.help.base.webapp. 
>  
> it can be used for own implementations through the WebappManager: http://www.eclipsezone.com/eclipse/forums/m91945034.html 
>  
> maybe it will soon be replaced by the IBM impl, but I don't know. 
>  
>>> 2.) org.eclipse.equinox.servlet.bridge, 
>> org.eclipse.equinox.servlet.ext and 
>> org.eclipse.equinox.servlet.httpservice (Simon Kaegi, 
>> Cognos): 
>>>  - this solution I have confronted with so far 
>>>  - possibility to integrate into tomcat, to build 
>> up a component oriented web application -> Is there 
>> an alternative solution? 
>  
> my main investigations are targeted to it: 
> seem to be suitable for a productive usage. 
>  
> Without changin a running web app server you can embed an osgi framework within a webapplication. All requests are directed to servlet-bundles through ONE central BRIDGE servlet. 
>  
> An alternative was Vasily Kuznetsov with his solution ( http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/equinox-dev/msg00693.ht ml). But he wants to adopt Simon Kaegis solution. 
>  
>>> 3.) org.eclipse.equinox.http (IBM): 
>>>  - so far I haven`t analyzed 
>>>  - seems to be something like 1.) 
>>>  - has it's own servlet engine 
>>>  - has NO Ext.-Points 
>>>  - is there a documentation for usage? 
> it is definitely a httpService with an integrated proprietary servlet engine. 
>  
> this concept, that an app server is bundled in one or more jars is like: 
>  - Jetty in OSCAR 
>  - a proprietary servlet engine in knopflerfish 
>  - tomcat in eclipse 
>  - ServiceTango 
>  - distributing Geronimo in several osgi bundles:  http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@geronimo.apache.org/msg10923 .html 
>  
> The registration occurs through an httpService or an extension, but mostly httpService. In effect it's almost the same. 
>  
> short explanation: http://www.eclipsezone.com/eclipse/forums/m91979648.html. 
>  
> 4.) your idea (within OHF) of implementing ONE CENTRAL osgi container within geronimo to manage osgi bundles (packaged as GBeans), which can communicate with elements of other containers (while simon kaegis approach is ONE osgi framework for each web app). this is one container beside an ejb, servlet and spring container. 
>  
> what do you think about these approaches? 
>  
> regards 
> martin
 |  
 |  
  |  
| Re: equinox on the server-side [message #56731 is a reply to message #56705] | 
Fri, 13 January 2006 00:51    | 
 
Eclipse User  | 
 | 
 | 
   | 
 
Originally posted by: skaegi.sympatico.ca 
 
Hi Eishay, 
 
I liked your analysis. 
 
I'd like to elaborate on point (2.1) slightly to emphasize the notion that 
the embedding can be done without the appserver being OSGi aware. The 
example you give is of a GBean that contains a runtime, but equally valid is 
a web-app or potentially an EJB (or frankly any Java code willing to launch 
the runtime). 
[Question: Do you know if any work has been done to create an equinox GBean 
embeddable in 1.0?] 
 
I think a lot of people are looking forward to (2.2) happening, but for now 
we have (1). 
-- 
You're right in terms of it being a question of scale however in my mind I 
don't categorize (1) and (2.2) separately. To me an RCP with a series of 
services like the Http Service is really a small App Server of sorts. I 
categorize things as "embedded" vs. "server base" primarily because of the 
requirements they place on the runtime but that's just me personally. 
 
-Simon 
 
 
 
"Eishay Smith" <eishays@us.ibm.com> wrote in message 
news:43C6F44E.6060706@us.ibm.com... 
> Lets be a bit more abstract. 
> The options I see are: 
> 
> 1. RCP contains Web container: Run a web container from within an RCP 
> and redirect events (e.g. SOAP) to resource bundles. 
> 2. Application server contains OSGi Bundles: App Server (e.g. Geronimo) 
> contains OSGi bundles and make them accessible to internal components. 
> In Geronimo case it might be servlets, EJBs, Spring etc. It might do it 
> in two ways: 
> 2.1. The application server contains the OSGi environment (e.g. a GBean 
> will contain am OSGi runtime and this will contain lots of bundles) 
> 2.2 OSGi is the base of the application server, i.e. the application 
> server is an RCP (with no UI of course). In the Geronimo case it might 
> be that each GBean is an OSGi bundle. 
> 
> Option (1) is good if you ride the Web Services / SOA hipe or want to do 
> something in small scale. Not sure its a good thing if you like to have 
> your bundles embedded in a rich server environment. Still, its the 
> easiest one to do now, and lots of time you do want to do things in 
> small scale. 
> I don't think the eclipse organization is going to stimulate any real 
> core server activity. The C in RCP stands for client and I don't see any 
> signs it will change. 
> 
> Option (2) will enable your bundles to interact with a rich server 
> environment, will be more scalable, but it doesn't have no support now, 
> though there are good signs (see the discussions I and others started in 
> the Geronimo list). 
> (2.1) is depending on the OSGi developer to figure out how to do. It's 
> probably easier to implement with the great improvements in Equinox, and 
> the solution can be ported to other App servers. 
> (2.2) should come from the App server developers, since you don't want 
> to have your own "special hacked" server. I think that is the best 
> option and that it will eventually happen. The problem is that the 
> various App server teams will not necessarily choose the same OSGi 
> framework (see Apache Felix). 
> 
> Do you this its the right categorization of options? 
> 
> Eishay 
> 
> 
> Martin Schikowski wrote: 
> > Eishay, 
> > 
> > I still try to find out the main differences: 
> > 
> >>> can somebody give me advises for the usage of one 
> >> of the following 3 approaches of server-side equinox: 
> >>> 1.) org.eclipse.help.appserver + org.eclipse.tomcat 
> >> (for Eclipse Help Center) 
> >>>  - the eclipse built-in webserver 
> >>>  - why has IBM launched a second osgi-bundled 
> >> web-server (see 3.). Is the new IBM solution more 
> >> flexible? and if, in which ways? 
> > 
> > help webapps are registered as extension to the ext.-point 
org.eclipse.help.base.webapp. 
> > 
> > it can be used for own implementations through the WebappManager: 
http://www.eclipsezone.com/eclipse/forums/m91945034.html 
> > 
> > maybe it will soon be replaced by the IBM impl, but I don't know. 
> > 
> >>> 2.) org.eclipse.equinox.servlet.bridge, 
> >> org.eclipse.equinox.servlet.ext and 
> >> org.eclipse.equinox.servlet.httpservice (Simon Kaegi, 
> >> Cognos): 
> >>>  - this solution I have confronted with so far 
> >>>  - possibility to integrate into tomcat, to build 
> >> up a component oriented web application -> Is there 
> >> an alternative solution? 
> > 
> > my main investigations are targeted to it: 
> > seem to be suitable for a productive usage. 
> > 
> > Without changin a running web app server you can embed an osgi framework 
within a webapplication. All requests are directed to servlet-bundles 
through ONE central BRIDGE servlet. 
> > 
> > An alternative was Vasily Kuznetsov with his solution 
( http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/equinox-dev/msg00693.ht ml). But he 
wants to adopt Simon Kaegis solution. 
> > 
> >>> 3.) org.eclipse.equinox.http (IBM): 
> >>>  - so far I haven`t analyzed 
> >>>  - seems to be something like 1.) 
> >>>  - has it's own servlet engine 
> >>>  - has NO Ext.-Points 
> >>>  - is there a documentation for usage? 
> > it is definitely a httpService with an integrated proprietary servlet 
engine. 
> > 
> > this concept, that an app server is bundled in one or more jars is like: 
> >  - Jetty in OSCAR 
> >  - a proprietary servlet engine in knopflerfish 
> >  - tomcat in eclipse 
> >  - ServiceTango 
> >  - distributing Geronimo in several osgi bundles: 
 http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@geronimo.apache.org/msg10923 .html 
> > 
> > The registration occurs through an httpService or an extension, but 
mostly httpService. In effect it's almost the same. 
> > 
> > short explanation: 
http://www.eclipsezone.com/eclipse/forums/m91979648.html. 
> > 
> > 4.) your idea (within OHF) of implementing ONE CENTRAL osgi container 
within geronimo to manage osgi bundles (packaged as GBeans), which can 
communicate with elements of other containers (while simon kaegis approach 
is ONE osgi framework for each web app). this is one container beside an 
ejb, servlet and spring container. 
> > 
> > what do you think about these approaches? 
> > 
> > regards 
> > martin
 |  
 |  
  |  
| Re: equinox on the server-side [message #56755 is a reply to message #56623] | 
Fri, 13 January 2006 01:33    | 
 
Eclipse User  | 
 | 
 | 
   | 
 
Originally posted by: skaegi.sympatico.ca 
 
Hi Martin, 
 
It looks like you've done a good job of answering your own questions. 
All the links you've added are absolutely great! 
 
I can talk a bit about trade-offs for the first 3. 
 
The help.webapp approach let's you deploy a complete "webapp" as described  
in your "web.xml" deployement descriptor. I really like this approach as  
the API is tied to the familiar servlet API. It's a little less flexibile  
than the HttpService in that it doesn't directly support the adding and  
removing of resources. As I see it a bigger issue is that restricts your  
deployment choices in that you can only use this approach in a  
(potentially-headless) RCP. 
 
The servlet-bridge and equinox.http really offer the same functionality  
through the OSGi Http Service. Although the API is quite small it takes  
some time to get used to registering and unregisterin servlets and  
resources instead of doing so by web.xml. That being said, the approach  
offers you a little more choice on deployment as the servlet-bridge lets  
you deploy into an appserver directly. 
 
Also, you had a bullet about the lack of extensions for equinox.http... 
org.equinox.servlet.ext adds extension points for "any" http service so  
you can use it with org.eclipse.equinox.http if you like. 
 
-- 
 
-Simon 
 
  
"Martin Schikowski" <schikowski@gmx.de> wrote in message  
news:33475632.1137073317837.JavaMail.root@cp1.javalobby.org... 
> Eishay, 
>  
> I still try to find out the main differences: 
>  
> > > can somebody give me advises for the usage of one 
> > of the following 3 approaches of server-side equinox: 
> > >  
> > > 1.) org.eclipse.help.appserver + org.eclipse.tomcat 
> > (for Eclipse Help Center) 
> > >  - the eclipse built-in webserver 
> > >  - why has IBM launched a second osgi-bundled 
> > web-server (see 3.). Is the new IBM solution more 
> > flexible? and if, in which ways?  
>  
> help webapps are registered as extension to the ext.-point  
org.eclipse.help.base.webapp. 
>  
> it can be used for own implementations through the WebappManager:  
http://www.eclipsezone.com/eclipse/forums/m91945034.html 
>  
> maybe it will soon be replaced by the IBM impl, but I don't know. 
>  
> > >  
> > > 2.) org.eclipse.equinox.servlet.bridge, 
> > org.eclipse.equinox.servlet.ext and 
> > org.eclipse.equinox.servlet.httpservice (Simon Kaegi, 
> > Cognos): 
> > >  - this solution I have confronted with so far 
> > >  - possibility to integrate into tomcat, to build 
> > up a component oriented web application -> Is there 
> > an alternative solution? 
>  
> my main investigations are targeted to it: 
> seem to be suitable for a productive usage. 
>  
> Without changin a running web app server you can embed an osgi framework  
within a webapplication. All requests are directed to servlet-bundles through  
ONE central BRIDGE servlet. 
>  
> An alternative was Vasily Kuznetsov with his solution  
( http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/equinox-dev/msg00693.ht ml). But he wants  
to adopt Simon Kaegis solution. 
>  
> > >  
> > > 3.) org.eclipse.equinox.http (IBM): 
> > >  - so far I haven`t analyzed 
> > >  - seems to be something like 1.) 
> > >  - has it's own servlet engine 
> > >  - has NO Ext.-Points 
> > >  - is there a documentation for usage? 
> it is definitely a httpService with an integrated proprietary servlet engine. 
>  
> this concept, that an app server is bundled in one or more jars is like: 
>  - Jetty in OSCAR 
>  - a proprietary servlet engine in knopflerfish 
>  - tomcat in eclipse 
>  - ServiceTango 
>  - distributing Geronimo in several osgi bundles:  
 http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@geronimo.apache.org/msg10923 .html 
>  
> The registration occurs through an httpService or an extension, but mostly  
httpService. In effect it's almost the same. 
>  
> short explanation: http://www.eclipsezone.com/eclipse/forums/m91979648.html. 
>  
> 4.) your idea (within OHF) of implementing ONE CENTRAL osgi container within  
geronimo to manage osgi bundles (packaged as GBeans), which can communicate  
with elements of other containers (while simon kaegis approach is ONE osgi  
framework for each web app). this is one container beside an ejb, servlet and  
spring container. 
>  
> what do you think about these approaches? 
>  
> regards 
> martin
 |  
 |  
  |   |   
Goto Forum:
 
 Current Time: Tue Nov 04 01:42:20 EST 2025 
 Powered by  FUDForum. Page generated in 0.06979 seconds  
 |