It would be really great to have a Felix implementation of the new Http Whiteboard specification from OSGi R6!
Regards, Neil > On 15 Apr 2015, at 15:42, Frank Langel <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks Rob, > > netty.io is more independent and has way fewer and cleaner dependencies as > far as I can see. Therefore, I am leaning towards netty.io as well. Most > important though would be to pick one implementation and focus on that > implementation, not split effort between netty.io and undertow. As a > second requirement, the http stack should be light, I wouldn’t want to > carry around half a jboss in my http-undertow bundle :=) > > Best > Frank > > On 4/15/15, 1:54 PM, "Rob Walker" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Done a bit of background reading and both netty and undertow sound >> interesting - they both score pretty high on the performance graph >> linked to in the OP. >> >> Any particular reason to go undertow vs netty. Seems netty started in >> JBOSS but then move solo when they wanted a more to-the-metal approach >> which became undertow. Netty seems a bit more feature rich at this >> stage, which could perhaps be useful/interesting. >> >> Of course the beauty of OSGi and projects like Felix etc is that there's >> no reason not to have multiple HttpService implementations, assuming >> there are enough contributors. >> >> FWIW - our Felix project is on a very old cut of the Jetty based service >> and I have a background action to move to a newer one. I'm not sure I'll >> have time to help in implementing a netty/undertow based implementation >> (although I haven't ruled that out) - but could be a guinea pig in >> helping test it out in a real OSGi based App. >> >> -- Rob >> >> On 14/04/2015 15:47, Achim Nierbeck wrote: >>> Hi Nick, >>> >>> Right now the "backlog" is a bit thin [1], but help is certainly >>> appreciated :) >>> The main issue PAXWEB-771 still needs to collect the items to do. >>> But right now neither Harald or I do have a lot of free cycles for it :( >>> It might be better to move this discussion to the ops4j mailinglist, >>> that's >>> why I cross posted this answer. >>> >>> regards, Achim >>> [1] - https://ops4j1.jira.com/projects/PAXWEB/issues >>> >>> 2015-04-14 15:41 GMT+02:00 Nick Baker <[email protected]>: >>> >>>> We (Pentaho) can help with this. We¹d like to transition off Tomcat >>>> clusters to Karaf instances. One of the issues with this migration >>>> we¹ve >>>> identified is Jetty performance. Our next release will go out Tomcat >>>> with >>>> Karaf embedded, Felix HTTP Bridge spanning the two. Not where we want >>>> to >>>> be! What¹s the timeframe for the merge? Do you have a backlog of issues >>>> related to this? Let us know how we can help. >>>> >>>> -Nick Baker >>>> >>>> On 4/14/15, 7:31 AM, "Achim Nierbeck" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> nope it's actually Pax-Web 5.0 M1 and M2 (from the pax-web-undertow >>>>> branch) >>>>> which uses undertow only. And it's none of the fabric8 developers it's >>>>> Harald Wellmann, who also takes care of the Pax Exam. >>>>> >>>>> Right now I'm trying to find a way of having undertow as the third >>>>> supported container for pax web, to merge the pax-web-undertow >>>>> branch into the Pax-Web main branch for a 5.0 >>>>> Help appreciated by the way ;) >>>>> >>>>> regards, Achim >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2015-04-14 13:28 GMT+02:00 Nick Baker <[email protected]>: >>>>> >>>>>> I could have swore one of the fabric8 developers was working on a >>>>>> pax-web-wildfly which is undertow-based. Not finding it via search. >>>>>> >>>>>> -Nick >>>>>> Original Message >>>>>> From: Rob Walker >>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 5:44 AM >>>>>> To: [email protected] >>>>>> Reply To: [email protected] >>>>>> Subject: Re: Jetty vs Undertow >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Interesting. Jetty is quite a long way down that graph compared to >>>>>> those. >>>>>> >>>>>> I know Richard (founder of Oscar which became Felix) was always >>>>>> interested in light/fast HttpService implementations. Could be an >>>>>> interesting little side project. >>>>>> >>>>>> Wiring Jetty into the very original OSGi HttpService interface didn't >>>>>> actually take that much work, although I haven't been back to the >>>>>> spec >>>>>> of late to see what's changed or been added that might make things >>>>>> harder >>>>>> >>>>>> -- Rob >>>>>> >>>>>> On 14/04/2015 11:27, Frank Langel wrote: >>>>>>> When using Felix http module in performance critical applications, >>>>>> Jetty >>>>>>> seems to underperform compared to modern servlet libraries such as >>>>>> undertow >>>>>>> or netty: >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r9&hw=peak&test=jso >>>> n >>>>>>> Has/Is anyone working on a plug-in replacement for Undertow/Netty. >>>>>>> Any >>>>>>> experience/performance measurements? Any plans? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks a lot in advance >>>>>>> Frank >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Ascert - Taking systems to the edge >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> SA +27 21 300 2028 >>>>>> UK +44 20 7488 3470 ext 5119 >>>>>> www.ascert.com >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> Apache Member >>>>> Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC >>>>> OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> >>>>> Committer & >>>>> Project Lead >>>>> blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/> >>>>> Co-Author of Apache Karaf Cookbook <http://bit.ly/1ps9rkS> >>>>> >>>>> Software Architect / Project Manager / Scrum Master >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> -- >> >> >> Ascert - Taking systems to the edge >> [email protected] >> SA +27 21 300 2028 >> UK +44 20 7488 3470 ext 5119 >> www.ascert.com >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
