ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrey Kornev <andrewkor...@hotmail.com>
Subject RE: OSGi migration may require a special marshaller
Date Mon, 02 Nov 2015 17:25:15 GMT

The fundamental hurdle we need to jump over to make Ignite OSGi-enabled is the marshalling.
More specifically the issue is with deserialization of the classes that are provided by the
bundles other than the Ignite bundle itself. 

When the Ignite transport layer receives a message it needs to figure out how to deserialize
the bytes and for that it needs to know the bundle that provides the class to be deserailized.
At this point TCCL is of no use. To make things more complex, the class may contain other
classes that come from other bundles, and so on recursively. This means that each object in
the hierarchy must be serialized with its bundle name (or bundle id), so that the deserializer
will then be able to correctly resolve the class while traversing the object hierarchy during

Unfortunately, Ignite's OptimizedMarshaller is lacking the ability to plug in a custom class
resolver. Romain's solution was to use Kryo that does provide a way to customize class resolution.
It has solved the problem of capturing the bundle info and he was able to successfully run
Ignite as a bundle in an OSGi container (after some repackaging and inclusion of the manifest).
But Kryo-based marshalling introduced a lot of complexity to the code and incorrect use of
Kryo's numerous serializers caused some weird hard-to-debug issues in the Ignite core (like
duplicate cache entries due to incorrect marshalling of the GridDhtPArtitonFullMap class --
go figure!). Overall the Kryo-based solution is brittle and hard to maintain.

I feel the correct solution to OSGi problem would be to 
1) enhance the OptimizedMarshaller to allow custom class resolution.
2) provide an OSGi-enabled OptimizedMarshaller (in addition to the original one) to be used
in OSGi environment.


> From: raulk@apache.org
> Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 12:41:47 +0000
> Subject: Re: OSGi migration may require a special marshaller
> To: dev@ignite.apache.org
> Hi Romain,
> I'm working on the OSGi compatibility of Ignite. I appreciate your input.
> I'm thinking about the situation you describe and I wonder if you're
> exporting Ignite as an OSGi service which is then consumed from other
> bundles. Under this situation, it would be quite easy to reproduce the
> behaviour you describe if Ignite is not resolving classes via the TCCL.
> Need to dig deeper into that.
> Off the top of my head, there are two alternatives to solve it:
> 1. Use the TCCL for marshalling/unmarshalling (if not already used) – we
> gotta be wary of possible regressions.
> 2. Create a special OSGi header Ignite-Export-Package so that bundles
> containing DTOs can expose packages to Ignite's marshallers.
> Regards,
> *Raúl Kripalani*
> PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big Data and
> Messaging Engineer
> http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
> http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
> On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 9:56 AM, Gilles, Romain <romain.gilles@misys.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'm really interested in this issue:
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1270 . We some stuff to make
> > it work in our osgi environment. The main issue for us now is the
> > serialization. I think it you will have to rework the OptimizedMarshaller
> > or any other marshaller that works with object that come from outside your
> > class space.
> >
> > We have try kryo that works. Kryo provide an extension point in order to
> > resolve the classes:
> > https://github.com/EsotericSoftware/kryo/blob/master/src/com/esotericsoftware/kryo/ClassResolver.java
> > . With this extension we are able to solve the problem of external classes.
> > The only issue with kryo is that some classes need a certain care in the
> > serialization process and therefore a specialized serializer.
> >
> > So I would like to know from the community what do think of changing the
> > way the optimized marshaller works or introducing the support of yet
> > another marshaller based on a kryo like technology?
> >
> >
> > Thanks in advance,
> >
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> >
> > Romain.
> >
> >
> > PS: I'm ready to help in the both cases.
> > "Misys" is the trade name of the Misys group of companies. This email and
> > any attachments have been scanned for known viruses using multiple
> > scanners. This email message is intended for the named recipient only. It
> > may be privileged and/or confidential. If you are not the named recipient
> > of this email please notify us immediately and do not copy it or use it for
> > any purpose, nor disclose its contents to any other person. This email does
> > not constitute the commencement of legal relations between you and Misys.
> > Please refer to the executed contract between you and the relevant member
> > of the Misys group for the identity of the contracting party with which you
> > are dealing.
> >
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message