Question

We re working on an OSGi-based infrastructure for processing stream-based data flows. Specific processing tasks are executed by individual OSGi components. We now need the possibility to distribute those components over different machines, which means, we need some kind of communication mechanism between OSGi components/containers.

在我的研究期间我遇到了不同的可能解决办法:R-OSGi,Patricia CXF,用于分发OSGi, Eclipse Communication Framework。

ECF似乎特别令人感兴趣,因为它支持不同的运输方式,支持像服务发现这样的 st。

我的核心问题:

Are there any detailed tutorials/walk-throughs for setting up an ECF infrastructure within Felix? (from my research, I found, that Felix support has been added recently)
Are there any solutions besides the three listed above which I might have missed?
Is there a reason for taking Apache CXF instead of ECF?

Answer 1

第一个问题——是否与费利克斯岛建立电子合作框架有详细的步行——我不知道答案,尽管有人可能利用搜索引擎来找到这些术语的组合。

The problem is ECF uses the Equinox infrastructure, and has at times inadvertently relied on packages that are non-public through transitive dependencies (particularly the Runtime API which uses Equinox for non-public debugging). This, in turn, means that ECF relies on a whole host of other components to be available and it s this set which typically isn t well defined on a Felix runtime.

你们错失了Peremus Service Fabric,这是一个商业的奥基云解决方案。我不敢肯定,你是否特别侧重于公开来源,但如果你包括商业许可,他们就会有一个非常强大的远程服务结构。

最后,阿帕奇·塞克斯基金会对ECF问题——如果你重新使用费利克斯的话,我就认为,与阿帕奇·塞克斯基金会打交道可能比参加ECF容易。这主要是因为依赖性套的建立和投入使用,加上ECF可能无法在费利克斯进行测试,因此可能承担Equinox操作时间的特定方面(例如,包括操作时间的母子舱载体代表团在boot子板上提取物)。这实际上只是生态环境结构本身的过错,而是生态环境生态系统如何运作的表现。

If you want to communicate with non-OSGi runtimes, there s an advantage in the Apache CXF in that they can generate WDSL for interaction with other languages. I believe that you can do the same thing in ECF with a bit more work. The CXF solution is likely to be more verbose than a corresponding ECF one (WSDL always is) but if you re not using high volumes of requests this isn t likely to make a significant difference.

友情链接