karaf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christian Schneider <ch...@die-schneider.net>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Predictable Boot Feature Startup Order...
Date Sat, 19 Nov 2016 11:34:35 GMT
I think it is very important to resolve as many bundles in one go as 
possible. When installing them one by one it usually creates the need 
for bundle refreshs.

 From the numbering of the bundle ids I found a strange thing btw.
When I create a feature with my own bundle and several dependent 
features it seems that my own bundle always has the lowest bundle id and 
the others follow in the reverse ordering. It looks a bit a like a depth 
first search. I wonder if that could be reversed. It at least would make 
finding the user bundles simpler at the end of the list.
Not a big thing for me but I wonder if it could be changed.

I am not sure how it works exactly in the feature resolver. If it spits 
out a list of bundles at some point then I think it might just work to 
install the bundles in the reverse order.

  Christian


On 18.11.2016 17:03, James Carman wrote:
> 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/
>>


-- 
Christian Schneider
http://www.liquid-reality.de

Open Source Architect
http://www.talend.com


Mime
View raw message