streams-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Danny Sullivan <dsulliv...@hotmail.com>
Subject RE: Using Camel for Routing
Date Wed, 16 Oct 2013 18:58:27 GMT
I see the value in Streams as the ability of subscribers to get activity based on filters.
To be clear, I do not want to eliminate processing, but do want to make the focus of processing
tailored to the subscribers' filters. My more grand vision is that only the most relevant
activity will be returned to the Subscriber and similar activity will be aggregated into single
activities (this would be a little down the road). This processing would happen after the
activity is stored in the DB.
Do you imagine that Streams will come packaged with some processing components that will format
other non-activitystrea.ms formatted json? I do think it'd be pretty cool if you could fire
up Streams, input a couple Facebook Friends and people you follow on Twitter, and have all
of that activity posted in one place. That might be better suited for a new separate module
(something like streams-format?) if we decide on the web-application route.
-Danny

> Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 11:22:51 -0700
> Subject: Re: Using Camel for Routing
> From: chris@cxtsoftware.com
> To: dev@streams.incubator.apache.org
> 
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:12 AM, Danny Sullivan <dsullivan7@hotmail.com>wrote:
> 
> > I think what is happening here is that we have different ideas about the
> > architecture of the application.
> > Here's what I'm thinking:
> > *All processing of activity would happen BEFORE it's posted to Streams*All
> > activity posted to Streams is in activitystrea.ms format
> > The Camel/EIP/OSGi way:
> > *The user is able to post anything to Streams, doesn't matter what format
> > it's in*The user can add processing components to Streams that format
> > everything that is input to activitystrea.ms format, these can be easily
> > plugged in, moved around, or taken out
> > If we decide to go the second route, I think Camel would be the best way
> > to go. However, I'd like to make the case for the first approach. The
> > application can be quickly started and tested by a developer and user with
> > the the first approach. If the user decides they want to experiment with
> > twitter/facebook data (like Chris suggested) they can write a custom
> > application (which can be a camel/eip application or even a python, ruby,
> > etc application) that takes in the twitter/facebook data, formats it to
> > activitystrea.ms format and then POSTs it to Streams. Also note: the
> > webapp would NOT need to be restarted to add these. I don't think we'd lose
> > a lot by going this route: in order to add the custom processing components
> > in Camel, a Java component would still need to be written before it's
> > plugged in to the camel.xml (and I think you would be tied to Java with
> > this approach).
> > Quite simply: We should keep formatting activity separate processing
> > activity
> > Perhaps I am missing some processing that could happen in between an
> > activity's entrance to Streams and it's storage? If this is the case, I
> > would make the argument that this processing should happen on an activities
> > EXIT from Streams (there should be a way for a Subscriber to specify, in
> > its filters or by some other means, the activity that it wants to see)
> >
> 
> Danny, what do you see as the scope for Streams? If you eliminate data
> input in non-activitystrea.ms format and eliminate processing data what
> does it do, just store each message (unmodified) and output it to
> subscribers?
> 
> 
> > -Danny
> >
> > > Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 10:11:23 -0700
> > > Subject: Re: Using Camel for Routing
> > > From: chris@cxtsoftware.com
> > > To: dev@streams.incubator.apache.org
> > >
> > > Jason,
> > >
> > > I agree with you. I guess my vision of streams was a little grander in
> > the
> > > long run where you could configure the system to accept input from
> > various
> > > sources (facebook, twitter...) and process them in certain ways. So it
> > > would have components that would know how to talk with Twitter and
> > convert
> > > tweets to activities then send it to the right process. So depending on
> > how
> > > you configure your system, it would create the proper routes from
> > component
> > > to component to allow processing dynamically which would require a
> > > framework like Camel (don't think Storm helps us here since it's a
> > compile
> > > time configuration to my understanding). The nice thing about something
> > > like camel is it allows you to reconfigure all the routes at runtime.
> > This
> > > is another reason I liked OSGI support as well as it allows deploying new
> > > components without restarting the server (webapp). Of course to scale it
> > > would require being able to deploy the configuration across multiple
> > > machines which gets fun.
> > >
> > > Maybe my vision is too big for this project but it's where my head has
> > been
> > > at.
> > >
> > > Chris
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 7:54 AM, Jason Letourneau
> > > <jletourneau80@gmail.com>wrote:
> > >
> > > > My only real complaint with this approach is that interjecting new
> > > > components (processing components) becomes less plug and play without
> > > > writing Java code in streams - with the Camel routing approach,
> > > > streams Java is a black box and you just change the camel xml.
> > > >
> > > > The primary rationale in using Camel was gaining all of the
> > > > architectural benefits one gains from  enterprise integration patterns
> > > > (truth: simplicity is not one and is a tradeoff for flexibility, but
> > > > generally is considered a universal truth not one relegated to Camel
> > > > and EIP).
> > > >
> > > > Jason
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Danny Sullivan <
> > dsullivan7@hotmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > Hey All,
> > > > > I would like to merge the webservice branch with trunk. I think
> > making
> > > > streams web service based allows for a better focus on the goal of the
> > > > application: process activitystrea.ms formatted activity json. While
> > > > moving to a webservice model would lose us support for many of the use
> > > > cases Chris mentioned (i.e twitter and facebook), I think the downsides
> > > > would be mitigated by allowing and encouraging users to write custom
> > > > appenders that take in twitter/facebook data, format it to
> > > > activitystrea.ms standards, and POST to the Streams Server. These
> > > > appenders could even be written in any language as long as the output
> > is
> > > > activitystrea.ms json. Compared to the trunk branch, I think the web
> > > > service design employs the "black box" idiom in a much simpler
> > fashion. I
> > > > would be happy to hear contradicting thoughts and would encourage a
> > > > discussion on this design switch.
> > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > Danny
> > > > >> From: dsullivan7@hotmail.com
> > > > >> To: dev@streams.incubator.apache.org
> > > > >> Subject: RE: Using Camel for Routing
> > > > >> Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 16:07:06 -0400
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I wrote up something quickly so I could demo the functionality
as a
> > web
> > > > service as opposed to Camel. The new branch is available here:
> > > > >>
> > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/streams/branches/webservice/
> > > > >> note that the new publishing and subscribing urls are:
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > http://localhost:8080/streams-web/app/publisherRegisterhttp://localhost:8080/streams-web/app/subscriberRegister
> > > > >> I used a Spring Web Service only because I was more familiar
with
> > it, I
> > > > would like to research other alternatives (CXF) if it's clear that a
> > web
> > > > service is a realistic alternative. The main changes to the
> > application are
> > > > the web controller located here:
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/streams/branches/webservice/streams-web/src/main/java/org/apache/streams/mvc/controller/StreamsWebController.java
> > > > >> Which handles the input and output of the application, which
were
> > > > handled by the camel context before. The other main change is the use
> > of
> > > > the streams-components module located here:
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/streams/branches/webservice/streams-components/
> > > > >> This module contains service classes that return the correct
output
> > on
> > > > each request sent to the controller. I reused the Publisher and
> > Subscriber
> > > > objects as well as the activityConsumerWarehouse and
> > > > activitySubscriberWarehouse, I think they would be moved to the
> > > > streams-components package if we want to go this route.
> > > > >> Overall, I think the flow through the application is much more
> > > > understandable. Previously, a developer would have to follow an
> > activity
> > > > through the camelContext.xml as well as through dynamically created
> > routes
> > > > verses the web service which provides clear entry and exit points to
> > the
> > > > application. I'd really like to hear feedback on this one, I really
> > don't
> > > > want to lose any efficiencies that we could be from
> > > > messaging/osgi/camel/activemq.
> > > > >> Thanks,
> > > > >> Danny
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > From: dsullivan7@hotmail.com
> > > > >> > To: dev@streams.incubator.apache.org
> > > > >> > Subject: RE: Using Camel for Routing
> > > > >> > Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 20:17:13 -0400
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Thanks for the update Jason. I'll keep the Spring MVC app
in a
> > > > separate branch (hopefully it won't take too long) and then perhaps we
> > can
> > > > reassess having both component and web container deployment? I think
> > it's a
> > > > good idea to keep both options in mind especially because this
> > technology
> > > > is relatively young.
> > > > >> > Thanks!
> > > > >> > Danny
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > > Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 19:50:59 -0400
> > > > >> > > Subject: Re: Using Camel for Routing
> > > > >> > > From: jletourneau80@gmail.com
> > > > >> > > To: dev@streams.incubator.apache.org
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > Because of the osgi container support in addition to
deployment
> > as
> > > > a web
> > > > >> > > app - when last we visited this topic - I think the
majority
> > was in
> > > > favor
> > > > >> > > of keeping the component style deployment in addition
to web
> > > > container
> > > > >> > > deployment
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > On Thursday, October 3, 2013, Danny Sullivan wrote:
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > > Hey all,
> > > > >> > > > I've been considering taking a stab at moving
streams from
> > it's
> > > > current
> > > > >> > > > configuration with Camel to a Spring Web Service.
Concerns
> > over
> > > > failover
> > > > >> > > > and load balancing would be mitigated by the Cassandra
DB
> > > > (running on 9160)
> > > > >> > > > and Storm (which depends on an instance of Zookeeper
on 2181).
> > > > Before I
> > > > >> > > > start lancing any windmills I thought it'd be
nice to get
> > input
> > > > on why the
> > > > >> > > > design choice was made to base the application
around Camel?
> > > > >> > > > I think that tracking the flow of an activity
through the
> > > > application will
> > > > >> > > > be much easier if we use Spring MVC. I'll set
up a new branch
> > > > using the MVC
> > > > >> > > > architecture and I'll keep the community updated
as I go
> > along.
> > > > >> > > > Danny
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
 		 	   		  
Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message