Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-felix-users-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-felix-users-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EFCEB18C37 for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2015 17:44:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 26354 invoked by uid 500); 15 Nov 2015 17:44:35 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-felix-users-archive@felix.apache.org Received: (qmail 26292 invoked by uid 500); 15 Nov 2015 17:44:35 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@felix.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@felix.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@felix.apache.org Received: (qmail 26280 invoked by uid 99); 15 Nov 2015 17:44:35 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO spamd1-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 15 Nov 2015 17:44:35 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id B99D7C6614 for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2015 17:44:34 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd1-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 4.001 X-Spam-Level: **** X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.001 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[HTML_MESSAGE=3, KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY=1, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-us-east.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd1-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.7]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id djNKvhSYJWSN for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2015 17:44:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtprelay.b.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0084.b.hostedemail.com [64.98.42.84]) by mx1-us-east.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-us-east.apache.org) with ESMTP id 635C842B60 for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2015 17:44:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.248.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.248]) by smtprelay06.b.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6CDC8D016 for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2015 17:44:18 +0000 (UTC) X-Session-Marker: 646576656C6F706D656E74406D6F6269676F762E636F6D X-Spam-Summary: 50,0,0,,d41d8cd98f00b204,development@mobigov.com,:,RULES_HIT:41:72:152:355:379:582:599:800:901:962:967:973:983:988:989:1152:1189:1208:1212:1221:1260:1263:1313:1314:1345:1359:1381:1431:1437:1516:1517:1518:1534:1542:1575:1589:1594:1711:1730:1776:1792:2068:2069:2198:2199:2525:2528:2553:2557:2565:2682:2685:2859:2933:2937:2939:2942:2945:2947:2951:2954:3022:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3353:3769:3865:3866:3867:3868:3870:3871:3872:3874:3934:3936:3938:3941:3944:3947:3950:3953:3956:3959:4250:4321:5007:6117:6119:6261:6657:6678:7875:7903:8603:9025:9388:9392:10004:10049:10128:10226:10400:10848:11027:11232:11320:11658:11854:11914:12043:12517:12519:12663:12682:12740:12776:12855:13139:14089:14093:14096:21080:30012:30054:30070:30090,0,RBL:none,CacheIP:none,Bayesian:0.5,0.5,0.5,Netcheck:none,DomainCache:0,MSF:not bulk,SPF:fn,MSBL:0,DNSBL:none,Custom_rules:0:0:0,LFtime:2,LUA_SUMMARY:none X-HE-Tag: idea45_42bd8350c3562 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 4785 Received: from mail.noip.com (imap-ext [64.98.36.5]) (Authenticated sender: webmail@development@mobigov.com) by omf08.b.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2015 17:44:18 +0000 (UTC) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_cab2db0f403bf7769e2a0a0e3cec882e" Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2015 12:44:18 -0500 From: development@mobigov.com To: users@felix.apache.org Subject: Re: OSGI stream processing In-Reply-To: <3e580b68783a232b926a620427e72fde@mobigov.com> References: <3e580b68783a232b926a620427e72fde@mobigov.com> Message-ID: <48c24009ab9a58e4a4ec3015d418e79c@mobigov.com> X-Sender: development@mobigov.com User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.0.2 X-Originating-IP: [108.31.18.148] --=_cab2db0f403bf7769e2a0a0e3cec882e Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain Nevermind I think I got a little better understanding. Event admin does not return promises or support backpressure through these eventtypes because it was written before all of this. Are there plans to change the event admin api to become a publisher or does it serve a different purpose and if I am looking for streams support it would be better to write a custom publisher for events and pub-sub On 2015-11-15 11:54, development@mobigov.com wrote: >> I read an article this morning here. http://akarnokd.blogspot.hu/2015/11/asynchronous-event-streams-vs-reactive.html [1] My guess is that util.promises were more designed with OSGI services in mind rather than event streams so that is why some of the design decisions were made the way they were. I did think the author did have a couple of points though. I am still new to streams and osgi and think much of the article was over my head. I was hoping others could give me their feelings on some of the criticisms where the author may have had a point or been on the wrong track? Does the felix event admin use the promises library under the hood or is it completely separate because they are both at the compendium level and it would be a bad idea to have dependencies on other compendium libs. Is there a good example out there where I can take a look at the code and see how I should be looking to implement eventadmin with promises and streams. Thanks for any advise, David Daniel Links: ------ [1] http://akarnokd.blogspot.hu/2015/11/asynchronous-event-streams-vs-reactive.html --=_cab2db0f403bf7769e2a0a0e3cec882e--