karaf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Predictable Boot Feature Startup Order...
Date Fri, 18 Nov 2016 16:13:18 GMT
I know.  I looked at the code.  That's why I was surprised when I had
issues when trying it that way.  It could be I'm doing something strange
with CXF, but it works in a non-staged setup.  If I get some cycles,
perhaps I can try it again and record the error.


On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 11:11 AM Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@apache.org> wrote:

> Using staged features with one feature per set will have the exact same
> behavior than installing the features one by one.
>
> Here's the BootFeaturesInstaller code:
>
> List<Set<String>> stagedFeatures = parseBootFeatures(features);
> for (Set<String> features : stagedFeatures) {
>     featuresService.installFeatures(features,
> EnumSet.of(FeaturesService.Option.NoFailOnFeatureNotFound));
> }
> featuresService.bootDone();
>
>
>
> 2016-11-18 17:03 GMT+01:00 James Carman <james@carmanconsulting.com>:
>
> > Yes, I've tried using staged boot, but in 3.0.x it caused some classpath
> > issues with CXF.  It would be great if we could just set up our features
> so
> > that they're just installed in the order they're defined.
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 10:56 AM Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > You mean installing the features one by one instead of all in one go ?
> > > Have you tried using
> > >   (myfeature1,myfeature2),(myfeature3,myfeature4)
> > > so that you end up with 2 stages ?
> > > Ultimately, you can use
> > >   (myfeature1),(myfeature2),(myfeature3),(myfeature4)
> > >
> > > 2016-11-18 16:44 GMT+01:00 James Carman <james@carmanconsulting.com>:
> > >
> > > > Karaf 3.0.8+ now provides predictable boot feature startup order, but
> > the
> > > > 4.0.x line does not provide that guarantee.  It apparently tries to
> be
> > > > smart and figure out what you need, but sometimes it just works
> better
> > if
> > > > we can let the user control things explicitly.  Is there, perhaps, a
> > > > compromise here?  Could we perhaps have a switch in the
> > > > org.apache.karaf.features.cfg file that allows you to turn on manual
> > > > control of the startup order?  I'm not the only one who has
> encountered
> > > > this issue.  There have been emails recently where other folks have
> > > > observed it.  Thoughts?
> > > >
> > > > James
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > ------------------------
> > > Guillaume Nodet
> > > ------------------------
> > > Red Hat, Open Source Integration
> > >
> > > Email: gnodet@redhat.com
> > > Web: http://fusesource.com
> > > Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> ------------------------
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Red Hat, Open Source Integration
>
> Email: gnodet@redhat.com
> Web: http://fusesource.com
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message