diff options
| author | dims <dims@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68> | 2008-06-17 00:23:01 +0000 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | dims <dims@13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68> | 2008-06-17 00:23:01 +0000 |
| commit | bdd0a41aed7edf21ec2a65cfa17a86af2ef8c48a (patch) | |
| tree | 38a92061c0793434c4be189f1d70c3458b6bc41d /sandbox/jim | |
Move Tuscany from Incubator to top level.
git-svn-id: http://svn.us.apache.org/repos/asf/tuscany@668359 13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68
Diffstat (limited to 'sandbox/jim')
| -rw-r--r-- | sandbox/jim/docs/assembly.html | 69 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | sandbox/jim/docs/assembly.ppt | bin | 0 -> 19968 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | sandbox/jim/docs/assembly/Slide1.png | bin | 0 -> 40286 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | sandbox/jim/docs/exception_handling.html | 158 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | sandbox/jim/docs/overview.ppt | bin | 0 -> 33280 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | sandbox/jim/docs/overview/Slide1.png | bin | 0 -> 21875 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | sandbox/jim/docs/overview/Slide2.png | bin | 0 -> 20819 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | sandbox/jim/docs/runtime_overview.html | 86 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | sandbox/jim/docs/tuscany.runtime.001.jpg | bin | 0 -> 118685 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | sandbox/jim/docs/tuscany.runtime.pdf | bin | 0 -> 61524 bytes |
10 files changed, 313 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/sandbox/jim/docs/assembly.html b/sandbox/jim/docs/assembly.html new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..39f263939a --- /dev/null +++ b/sandbox/jim/docs/assembly.html @@ -0,0 +1,69 @@ +<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
<html>
<head>
<title>Tuscany Java Runtime Assembly</title>
</head>
<body>
<h1>Assembly</h1>
<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>This document details how the Java Runtime performs assembly. Assembly is the process of + wiring networks of services based on external configuration. Assembly may occur both + locally (i.e. Between two services in a shared memory space) and remotely. Wires between + two services within the same aggregate context are local; wires whose target is an + external service or external URI are remote. Remote wires always follow pass-by-value + semantics. Local wires generally follow pass-by-reference except when the component + implementation contract declares otherwise.</p>
<h2>Local Assembly</h2>
<p>The Tuscany Java Runtime (TJR) attempts to precompute as much as possible of the assembly + model when a configuration is registered. This process is termed the build phase. During + this phase, the runtime walks the configuration (typically consisting of module + components, components, entry points, and external services) and calls all registered + implementations of o.t.core.builder.RuntimeConfigurationBuilder which in turn decorate + the configuration with implementations of o.t.core.builder.RuntimeConfiguration + (examples include the implementations in o.a.t.container.java.config and + o.a.t.container.java.builder). RuntimeConfigurations are factories for creating instance + contexts based on the corresponding configuration artifact. For example, an SCA Java + component will be decorated with a RuntimeConfiguration that can produce an instance + context which manages a POJO injected with the appropriate properties and references as + defined by the configuration.</p>
<p>The strategy for how a runtime configuration creates an instance context is specific to + the implementation type. For example, the SCA Java client implementation uses + o.a.t.core.injection.PojoObjectFactory to create POJOs. This in turns uses + implementations of o.a.t.core.Injector to inject properties and references during + instantiation (the injectors are created during the build phase by + o.a.t.container.java.builder.JavaComponentContextBuilder). Injectors are configured with + implementations of o.a.t.core.injection.ObjectFactory to create or return a property or + reference value. For example, reference values will have an injector that uses a factory + such as o.a.t.core.injection.ReferenceTargetFactory which is capable of creating a proxy + to the target service. In cases where a proxy is not needed, a factory may return the + actual target instance.</p> + <h2>Remote Assembly - TBD</h2>
<h2>Runtime Assembly</h2>
<p>Runtime assembly is the process of wiring components which offer special services in the + runtime. Runtime assembly is done in a manner similar to the standard assembly described + above, except that system components have their own implementation type (cf. + o.a.t.core.system). The system implementation type supports all SCA Java Client and + Implementation model constructs (properties and references), metadata, and stateless and + module scope lifecycles (request and session scopes are not currently supported but they + could be added if needed). In addition, the system implementation type also supports the + following capabilities:</p> + <ul> + <li><i>Autowiring.</i> Autowiring provides the ability to resolve reference targets + based on interface type. This is used to resolve targets where the actual target + component is not important (or should remain unknown) as long as it provides the + required service, for example, a transaction manager or monitor factory. Autowire + targets must be configured in a system module component external to the source + component (otherwise one would use "regular" wiring). An autowire target must be + published as an entry point using the special "system" binding. Further, autowire + entry points are only visible to the parent aggregate context and its children. To + make an autowire entry point visible more than one level up in an aggregate + hierarchy, it must be republished as an entry point by the parent aggregate context. + The following demonstrates how autowiring occurs:<p/> + <img src="assembly/Slide1.png" alt="autowire"/> + <p>To understand autowiring in more detail, review + o.a.t.core.system.SystemAggregateContextImpl, + o.a.t.core.context.AggregateContextImp, and + o.a.t.core.system.builder.SystemComponentContextBuilder.</p> + </li> + <li><i>ParentContext.</i> System components can also contain references to their parent + aggregate context. This is done through the "ParentContext" metadata (e.g. + <code>@ParentContext</code></li> + </ul> + <h3>Hierarchical Runtime Assembly</h3>
<p>The TJR essentially assembles itself from a series of "system" components in a recursive + fashion. Aggregate contexts are created from Module Components which in turn contain + children that are assembled (other aggregates, simple components, entry points, and + external services). Aggregate contexts may also be autowired (e.g. + o.a.t.core.context.AggregateComponentContextImpl). Child aggregate contexts are managed + by a special scope context, o.a.t.core.context.scope.AggregateScopeContext. This allows + the runtime to assemble itself using a relatively lightweight builder infrastructure to + an arbitrarily deep nesting. For further details see o.a.t.core.system.builder and + o.a.t.core.system.config.</p> + </body> +</html> diff --git a/sandbox/jim/docs/assembly.ppt b/sandbox/jim/docs/assembly.ppt Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000000..3ffee9545c --- /dev/null +++ b/sandbox/jim/docs/assembly.ppt diff --git a/sandbox/jim/docs/assembly/Slide1.png b/sandbox/jim/docs/assembly/Slide1.png Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000000..03a2adf539 --- /dev/null +++ b/sandbox/jim/docs/assembly/Slide1.png diff --git a/sandbox/jim/docs/exception_handling.html b/sandbox/jim/docs/exception_handling.html new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..84b075baf0 --- /dev/null +++ b/sandbox/jim/docs/exception_handling.html @@ -0,0 +1,158 @@ +<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
<html>
<head>
<title>Exception Handling Guidelines for The Java Runtime</title>
</head>
<body>
<h1>Java Runtime Exception Policy</h1>
<p> The key tenet of this exception policy is that exceptions should be designed with an eye + toward what the catch clause would likely do with the exception. The three main cases + are: </p>
<ul> + <li>Code Exception: Code can work around the discovered problem</li> + <li>User Exception: Problem to be remedied by a human (e.g. Administrator)</li> + <li>Assertion Exception: Problem remedied by human fixing a bug in the code</li> + </ul> + <h2>Code Exceptions</h2> + <p> These are exceptions where it is expected that some calling code may be able to + completely handle the exception, without involvement of any user. In other words, the + exception is of an alternate way of returning a value. There is a reasonable chance that + calling code (maybe a couple levels up) will be able to catch the exception and either + try again or try some other approach to accomplishing its job. Note that there may be no + way of knowing whether the caller will be able to figure out a different approach to + handling the situation. This is especially true in reusable utility code. In these + cases, the exceptions should be considered to be code exceptions. The code that handles + the exception might just turn it into a different kind of exception.</p> + <h3>Implications</h3> + <p>In general, code exceptions should be checked exceptions. They should be named based on + what happened, rather than based on who is throwing the exception. If the exception is + well named, it should be possible for the exception to be present on signatures at + several levels of a call stack and still make sense (e.g. ServiceUnavailableException).</p> + <p>There are some cases where code exceptions should not be checked exceptions. If code + cannot reasonably be expected to recover from an exception, it should be unchecked, + Also, iIf a large fraction of the methods in the code would need to declare the + exception, then its declaration doesn't add much value and so it should be a + RuntimeException so it doesn't need to be declared. One example of this kind of + exception might be a RetryException. This exception might occur on some kind of resource + conflict where retrying the transaction is likely to solve it. Since it is solved + without human involvement it is still a "code exception". </p> + <h2>User Exceptions</h2> + <p> These are exceptions that signal a problem that will be handled by a person, so the most + important component of the exception is the message, rather than the type of the + exception. Unfortunately, the code that throws the original exception often will not + have enough information to give a meaningful message to the user that has all the + necessary context. The typical "user" in this situation is an administrator, where a + stack traceback wouldn't be very helpful. Because of this, it is important that code be + littered with try/catch blocks that do no more than add context to the exception message + and then rethrow.</p> + <p>In a previous project this was done by having a base UserException class that had an + array of messages, rather than just one message. For example, code that parses an SCA + subsystem file might have a rethrow that just adds "While parsing the xyz subsystem + file". That is a message that could not be generated by the code that discovered the + problem (say an XML parsing problem), so a combination of the original message (e.g. + "Missing end tag") and the higher level message ("while parsing the xyz subsystem file") + are both necessary for know what happened. Naturally it can be any number of levels + deep.</p> + <p> The handling code for a user exception will somehow notify a user of the message and + then possibly go on. There should be different kinds of exceptions when there need to be + different ways of handling of the message or different ways to continue. Different ways + to report the error: In a server, user exceptions can often be divided according to + fault: </p> + <ul> + <li>It's the fault of the client code that is sending the incoming message (e.g. SOAP + faults).</li> + <li>It's the fault of the code or configuration that is handling the message. </li> + </ul> + <p> If the problem is the fault of the client code, then the message needs to be reported + back to the client code in a format appropriate for the client. If the problem is the + fault of the server code or configuration, then only a vague "I've got a problem here" + message should be sent to the client and the real exception message should be logged + and/or sent to an administrator. Because of the two different ways of handling the + problem, there should be different exception types. For example, ClientException could + be used for exceptions that signal problems that are the client's fault. </p> + <p> The remaining user exceptions are typically problems with configuration or the + environment. Some of them will be severe enough that the entire application needs to be + brought down, while others could be handled by just logging the problem and going on. + This difference implies that there needs to be a different exception type. Advanced + Scenario: In the case of session-scoped services, the problem is likely to require that + the instance of the service be put into an error state (like paused). This is because + subsequent messages for the service have been sent on the assumption that the previous + message actually gets processed. If some configuration error prevents a session-scoped + service from handling a single message, all future (async) messages for that service + instance should be queued up so they can be processed once the problem has been solved. </p> + <h2>Assertion Exceptions</h2> + <p> Assertion exceptions are exceptions that result from a bug in Tuscany and as such are + also intended to be solved by humans, but in this case the humans are us --are the + developers of the SCA runtime. In these cases the message isn't nearly as important, + since the stack traceback provides valuable context. If an assertion exception occurs + little can be known about the state of the server. If we wanted to be safe we would say + that assertion exceptions always bring down the entire server. However, we could play it + a little looser and say that assertion exceptions only bring down the application in + which they are discovered. </p> + + + <h2>Guidelines</h2> + <p> The following are a set of guidelines based on the above exception philosophy: </p> + <h4>1. Checked vs. unchecked exceptions</h4> + <p> Unchecked exceptions should be used when an error condition is not recoverable. Checked + exceptions thrown by third party libraries that are not recoverable should be wrapped in + unchecked exceptions rather than being propagated up the call stack. For example, an + IOException raised when reading a file might be wrapped in an unchecked LoadException + containing the name of the file. + Unchecked must always be Javadoced and declared in the throws clause of a method. </p> + <h4>2. Assertion exceptions should use the standard JDK assert facilities</h4> + <h4>3. Any exception thrown to user code must extend the appropriate Exception as defined + by the specification. This will typically be a runtime Exception.</h4> + <h4>4. No other Exceptions should be thrown to user code. Each user API method should + catch any internal exceptions and wrap them in the applicable Exception defined + by the specification. Internal exceptions must ultimately extend either TuscanyException + or TuscanyRuntimeException. + <h4>4. When possible, create clear package exception hierarchies</h4> + <p> In most cases, packages should have a clear exception hierarchy with abstract root + checked and unchecked exceptions which more specific concrete exceptions extend. + Declaring the root package exceptions abstract avoids code throwing exceptions which are + too general. Creating an exception hierarchy allows client code using a particular + package to choose the level of exception handling granularity (which in turn simplifies + the client code by avoiding unwieldy try..catch clauses). </p> + <h4> 5. Preserve all stack trace information and the original exception</h4> + <p> Exceptions must always preserve the stack trace and original exception except under + special circumstances. When wrapping exceptions to propagate, never modify the stack + trace and always include the caught exception as the cause.</p> + <h4>6. Only include local information pertinent to the failure</h4> + <p> For I18N, contextual information stored in the Exception should not be localized. It + should comprise only data pertaining to the cause, such as the name of the artifact as + above, or a key that can be used by the top level exception handler. This is needed + because the locale used to render the exception may be completely different from the + locale used by the code raising the exception. For example, an exception may be thrown + on a system whose default locale is German, logged to the system log in English but + displayed to the end user in French, Japanese, whatever their native language is. </p> + <h4>7. For exceptions that require contextual information from various code layers, either + wrap exceptions or create exceptions that can accept additional context as they are + propagated up the call stack.</h4> + <p> If a failure requires information from multiple levels, e.g. “there was an error setting + property X on component Y in module Z” do one of the following. If the initial exception + should be wrapped as it is propagated (e.g. the exception occurs at a library boundary), + add additional context information in the wrapping exception(s). If the initial + exception can be propagated, include methods for adding additional context information + as the exception is rethrown up the stack. For example, the previous failure scenario + could result in the following exception handling strategy: </p> + <ul> + <li> A component property is configured with an invalid integer type</li> + <li> The property value parsing code attempts to load an integer value using parseInt(), + resulting in a NumberFormatException</li> + <li> NumberFormatException is wrapped in an InvalidParameterException (IPE) containing + the name of the property.</li> + <li> IPE extends a more general ConfigException, which has setters for adding additional + context information such as component and module names</li> + <li> As the IPE is thrown up the stack, the component and module parsers provide + additional context information.</li> + <li> The configuration loader then wraps the IPE in a ConfigLoadExeption and provides + the source from which the configuration is being loaded.</li> + <li> The UI being used to load the configuration reports the error to the user and + displays the appropriate contextual information</li> + </ul> + <h4>8. getMessage() must return unformatted context info. If the Exception contains multiple + context fields they should be surrounded in square brackets and separated by commas, + e.g. "[ property X, component Y, module Z ]"</h4> + <h4>9. Do not override the behaviour of Throwable.toString() and Throwable.printStackTrace()</h4> + <h4>10. The java.lang.Exception base class is Serializable so all subclasses must provide + a serial UID. Any context fields must be Serializable and should be defined in the + base java namespace for JDK1.4.</h4> + <h4>11. Exceptions that wrap other Exceptions should ensure that any wrapped Exception can + be deserialized in a client environment. This may require providing a custom + writeObject method to extract any context information from the wrapped Exception + during serialization; at a minimum the message should be preserved.</h4> + </body> +</html> diff --git a/sandbox/jim/docs/overview.ppt b/sandbox/jim/docs/overview.ppt Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000000..839fe71a8e --- /dev/null +++ b/sandbox/jim/docs/overview.ppt diff --git a/sandbox/jim/docs/overview/Slide1.png b/sandbox/jim/docs/overview/Slide1.png Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000000..cfaf8e54fd --- /dev/null +++ b/sandbox/jim/docs/overview/Slide1.png diff --git a/sandbox/jim/docs/overview/Slide2.png b/sandbox/jim/docs/overview/Slide2.png Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000000..6b4d1ab449 --- /dev/null +++ b/sandbox/jim/docs/overview/Slide2.png diff --git a/sandbox/jim/docs/runtime_overview.html b/sandbox/jim/docs/runtime_overview.html new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..5d9af90eb1 --- /dev/null +++ b/sandbox/jim/docs/runtime_overview.html @@ -0,0 +1,86 @@ +<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
<html>
<head>
<title>Tuscany Java Runtime Overview</title>
</head>
<body>
<h1>Tuscany Java Runtime Overview</h1>
<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>This document is intended to provide a high level view of the Tuscany Java Runtime. At + the most general level, the Tuscany Java Runtime is organized into a series of artifacts + which can be loosely defined as units of management. Runtime artifacts can vary from the + bootrap container, component containers to application components. Runtime artifacts are + managed by implementations of <i>o.a.t.core.context.Context</i>. which, at a minimium, + control their lifecycle state . The most prevalent type of context is + <i>o.a.t.core.InstanceContext</i>, which manages instances of a runtime artifact. + There are several types of instance context: </p> + <ul> + <li><i>SimpleComponentContext:</i> Manages implementation instances of a leaf + appplication component such as an SCA component, i.e. a component that has no + children. There is generally a 1:1 relationship between a simple context and a + component implementation instance.</li> + <li><i>AggregateContext:</i> Manages a context which contains child contexts such as an
SCA module component. Aggregates may contain SimpleComponentContexts,
EntryPointContexts and ExternalServiceContexts.</li>
<li><i>EntryPointContext:</i> Manages the public access point of a service offered by a + component or external service in a an aggregate context over a transport binding.</li> + <li><i>ExternalServiceContext:</i> Manages a local representation of a service external + to an aggregate context.</li> + <li><i>ScopeContext:</i> Manages a scope which defines the lifecycle and visibility of + component instances. SimpleComponentContexts, EntryPointContexts, External Services, + and AggregateComponentContexts are associated with a scope context. Further, + aggregate contexts contain scope contexts to manage the visibility of their + children.</li> + <li> + <i>RuntimeContext:</i>Manages a runtime instance. A runtime context is an aggregate + context that contains a root aggregate context and a system aggregate context.</li> + </ul> + <p>The relationship between contexts is described in the following diagram:</p> + <img alt="context.uml" src="overview/Slide1.png"/> + <h2>Configuration</h2> + <p>Runtime artifacts are defined by configuration artifact. The set of configuration + artifacts and their inter-relations are described by a Logical Configuration Model (LCM) + located in o.a.t.model.assembly. The LCM is an in-memory representation of configuration + information derviced from some external source (e.g. XML, programmatically, etc.). The + runtime uses an LCM to generate the appropriate context objects. For example, a + SimpleComponentContext is generated from a Component, an AggregateContext from a + ModuleComponent, etc. This is done through a multistep configuration process described + further on.</p> + <h2>The Runtime Bootstrap</h2> + <p>Contexts are assembled in hierarchical fashion, starting with the RuntimeContext:</p> + <img alt="context.uml" src="overview/Slide2.png"/> + <p>A host environment is responsible for bootstrapping the runtime, providing "core" + capabilities such as classloader semantics, and loading configuration artifacts. For + example, a host runtime will typically boostrap the runtime according to the following + steps:</p> + <ol> + <li>Instantiate a runtime context (the default implementation is + o.a.t.core.system.context.RuntimeContextImpl) with a collection of boostrap runtime + configuration builders (.cf the description of configuration processing), and an + implementation of o.a.t.common.monitor.MonitorFactory for logging. This context + serves as the runtime bootstrap.</li> + <li>Load system module components and register them with the runtime context. System + module components contain system components that provide core runtime functionality + such as support for the SCA Java Client and Implementation model, transport + bindings, configuration builders, and data binding.</li> + <li>Recursively load susbsystems, module components and other artifacts, registering + them with the runtime context as parts of an LCM. The runtime context will modify or + complete the LCM during this registration phase. Note that additional components and + other artifacts may be registered dynamically after the runtime has been brought + online.</li> + <li>Bring the runtime online.</li> + </ol> + <p>This design allows the Tuscany runtime to be hosted on a variety of technology platforms + such as J2SE, a Servlet engine, a J2EE container, or an OSGi container.</p> + <h2>Registering and Building Configuration</h2>
<p>A configuration is registered with its parent context which is always an + AggregateContext. For example, a SimpleComponent is registered with its parrent + AggregateContext. Similarly, an AggregateContext is registered with its parent context + which will be another AggregateContext. All registered aggregates form a hierarchy + descending either from the root or system aggregate contexts (whose parent is the + runtime context). When a component configuration is registered with its parent context, + the configuration is passed up the hierarchy for completion. At this point, a second + pass termed the build phase is made over the configuration and it is decorated with + factories that create Context instances (the specifics of this process are detailed in a + separate document; in brief, however, a pass is made over the configuration by + implementations of o.a.t.core.builder.RuntimeConfigurationBuilder, which are configured + system components).</p> + <h3>Runtime Configuration</h3> + <p>The core Tuscany runtime is also built in the same manner as described above. In this + case, the host environment registers system components with the system context (or one + of its children). These system component configurations are processed and decorated by a + series of bootstrap builders (c.f. o.a.t.core.system.builder). The system context is + then started and appropriate child contexts are created from the decorated model. These + contexts manage implementation instances which provide core runtime functionality. + System entry points may be wired to external services in other modules, thereby + providing a way to access system capabilities from other components. </p> + </body> +</html> diff --git a/sandbox/jim/docs/tuscany.runtime.001.jpg b/sandbox/jim/docs/tuscany.runtime.001.jpg Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000000..bd2c8e34d7 --- /dev/null +++ b/sandbox/jim/docs/tuscany.runtime.001.jpg diff --git a/sandbox/jim/docs/tuscany.runtime.pdf b/sandbox/jim/docs/tuscany.runtime.pdf Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000000..399f78a9b1 --- /dev/null +++ b/sandbox/jim/docs/tuscany.runtime.pdf |
