[Opensim-dev] Comms Manager
MW
michaelwri22 at yahoo.co.uk
Thu Feb 26 16:42:22 UTC 2009
I still think we should have a SharedRegistry that all Scenes have access to. Some of the current shared RegionModules could move to using it as well. And I know some of the other devs want one to; Adam and Stefan were talking about one in IRC the other day.
But if we all agree that we actually don't want one of them. Then a possible compromise might be adding a extra RegisterToAllRegistries method to the core Global registry interface so something like:
public interface IGridServiceCore
{
T Get<T>();
void RegisterInterface<T>(T iface);
void RegisterInterfaceToAllRegistries<T>(T iface);
bool TryGet<T>(out T iface);
}
This would add the interface to a list, that then is "copied" to each region that starts up, so a kind of auto registration. Without the modules having to be given scene references if the interface type they are using doesn't support that.
So all we would be doing is making OpenSimBase implement that interface and provide the support for the "auto registration" to Scenes with RegisterInterfaceToAllRegistries. Any module/plugin using RegisterInterface would only register with the Global/Application registry that wouldn't be accessable from regions. Of course they could then manually register themselves with the regions.
I just really dislike trying Scene/IScene into all the plugin interfaces. I'm fine with plugins being able to access them via a IApplicationPlugin if thats the way the plugin creator did things. But I also want a more generic module type that can still offer services to regions/scenes. Most likely using the plugin loader approach I mentioned earlier. If this extra plugin loading was done by a ApplicationPlugin then anyone who didn't want to support those types could easily remove that loader.
--- On Thu, 26/2/09, Melanie <melanie at t-data.com> wrote:
From: Melanie <melanie at t-data.com>
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] Comms Manager
To: michaelwri22 at yahoo.co.uk, opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
Date: Thursday, 26 February, 2009, 2:40 PM
I think that would introduce a layer of complexity in core, where i think that
complexity (e.g. registering to scenes) s better off distributed inside the
modules that actually need it. Keep it simple. I believe my approach is what
will work with the least amount of core code, and provide the greatest
flexibility.
Melanie
MW wrote:
> I know I said we should wait for other people to give some input, but just
one last suggestion.
>
> Maybe we should have three registeries. A ApplicationServiceRegistry that
is only accessable from the application level), A SharedServiceRegistry that is
accessable from the application and all scenes/regions. And then the current
Registry in Scene.
>
> Then its upto the modules/components/plugins to which registries they want
to register.
>
> And certain plugin types might only get references allowing them to
register to certain registeries.
> --- On Thu, 26/2/09, MW <michaelwri22 at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> From: MW <michaelwri22 at yahoo.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] Comms Manager
> To: opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> Date: Thursday, 26 February, 2009, 1:48 PM
>
> Well actually my suggestion of supporting multiple plugin interfaces
allowed both approaches and left everything up to the module creator.
> But I think we should wait for input from others now as we aren't
really getting anywhere on the fine details. I think we have the basis of a
system just need to get other peope's input so we can work out those small
details. Like the main one being should the global registry be accessable from
regions. And if we decide it shouldn't, is it okay for it be in the short
term so we can refactor comms manager easiest. ie comms manager becomes the
global registry for now.
> --- On Thu, 26/2/09, Melanie <melanie at t-data.com> wrote:
> From: Melanie <melanie at t-data.com>
> Subject: Re:
> [Opensim-dev] Comms Manager
> To: michaelwri22 at yahoo.co.uk, opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> Date: Thursday, 26 February, 2009, 1:36 PM
>
> If you want to be more flexible, then my approach is better. In your
model, a global module has not way to _prevent_ being accessed by Scene.
>
> I believe Scene has no business holding a ref to the application, or
accessing the global registry.
>
> In my design, each module has the power to decide whether it wants to be
accessible from Scene and what methods it exposes to it. Your method reduces
that duality into a single interface and makes all scenes be able to access all
methods on all interfaces. That leaves no room for isolation, even if a module
writer would want it.
>
> I believe the modules _should_ indeed register with each scene in a
callback, and that would actually let them register only to specific scenes if
they wanted to. More flexibility
> yet.
>
> Melanie
>
> MW wrote:
>> Hmm, I never suggested anything that would mean one scene be able to
> directly access another.
>>
>> I see the GlobalRegistry as a very basic interface something like:
>>
>> public interface IGridServiceCore
>> {
>> T Get<T>();
>> void RegisterInterface<T>(T iface);
>> bool TryGet<T>(out T iface);
>> }
>>
>> [Which would be in OpenSim.Framework or wherever]
>>
>> So if we did want a Scene to be able to access it, all it would need
on
> creation is pass a IGridServiceCore reference in its parameters. So it
> doesn't actually change anything compared to how things are now with
the
> shared modules.
>>
>> I just am still not sure that GlobalServices should have to
indivudally
> register with the Scenes even if they want to provide services to region
> modules. I see the
> module that handled User server comms as a global service but
> don't think it should have to register with all regions. I'm more
in
> mind that it should just register with the global registry and then region
> modules than access that.
>>
>> And yes nothing I have suggested stops a ApplicationModule and a
> RegionModule from sharing a dll, and the ApplicationModule starts up and
> registers the RegionModule or whatever. I just don't think its the
solution
> for everything. So am trying to think of way of being more flexible.
>>
>>
>> --- On Thu, 26/2/09, Melanie <melanie at t-data.com> wrote:
>> From: Melanie <melanie at t-data.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] Comms Manager
>> To: michaelwri22 at yahoo.co.uk, opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
>> Date: Thursday, 26 February, 2009, 1:14 PM
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> one of the paradigms is that no Scene should directly access another
>
>> Scene.
>>
>> Therefore, providing a clear path to the global registry from the DLL
Scene is in would break that isolation.
>>
>> Really, global modules that want/need to be accessed from Scene can
register an interface there.
>> Also, processing will probably need to be broken up into a part that
has the Scene type and a part that doesn't.
>>
>> This is where I think a global module and a region module as well as
the interfaces used between them can share a dll.
>>
>> The global module would register that interface on the region, and the
region modules uses it.
>>
>> That is much cleaner.
>>
>> Melanie
>>
>> MW wrote:
>>> Well I hadn't really thought out all the details but what I
meant
> is
>> we
>>> can have a IApplicationPlugin that can load other plugin types
itself.
>
>>>
>
>>>
>>>
>>> So if we look at the code in OpenSimBase that loads
> IApplicationplugins it
>> is:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> protected virtual void LoadPlugins()
>>>
>>> {
>>>
>>> PluginLoader<IApplicationPlugin> loader =
>>>
>>> new PluginLoader<IApplicationPlugin>(new
>> ApplicationPluginInitialiser(this));
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> loader.Load("/OpenSim/Startup");
>>>
>>> m_plugins = loader.Plugins;
>>>
>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> and the plugin initialiser is :
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> public class ApplicationPluginInitialiser :
PluginInitialiserBase
>>>
>>> {
>>>
>>> private OpenSimBase
> server;
>>>
>>> public ApplicationPluginInitialiser (OpenSimBase s) {
server =
> s;
>> }
>>>
>>> public override void Initialise (IPlugin plugin)
>>>
>>> {
>>>
>>> IApplicationPlugin p = plugin as IApplicationPlugin;
>>>
>>> p.Initialise (server);
>>>
>>> }
>>>
>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> so there is no reason why inside a ApplicationPlugin we can't
do
>> something like:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> public void Initialise(OpenSimBase openSim)
>>>
>>> {
>>>
>>> LoadGridServiceModules(openSim);
>>>
>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Protected virtual void LoadGridServiceModules(OpenSimBase
openSimBase)
>>>
>>>
>
>>>
>>> {
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> PluginLoader<IGridServiceModule> loader =
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> new PluginLoader<IGridServiceModule>(new
>> GridServicePluginInitialiser(openSimBase.GlobalRegistry));
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> loader.Load("/OpenSim/GridService");
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> m_plugins = loader.Plugins;
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> public class GridServicePluginInitialiser :
PluginInitialiserBase
>>>
>>> {
>>>
>>> private IGridServiceCore m_core;
>>>
>>> public ApplicationPluginInitialiser (IGridService core) {
> m_core =
>> core;
> }
>>>
>>> public override void Initialise (IPlugin plugin)
>>>
>>> {
>>>
>>> IGridServiceModule p = plugin as IGridServiceModule;
>>>
>>> p.Initialise (m_core);
>>>
>>> }
>>>
>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> So its then loaded the IGridServiceModules and passed them only a
>> reference to the GlobalRegistry (from OpenSimBase).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> And for plugins/modules that want to register with scenes, we
could
>>> either have another plugin type and loader, or just use
>>> IApplicationPlugin directly for them.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Of course this opens up the question if at any point the
> GlobalRegistry
>>> should be accessable from scenes. If we are going to go with
> the
>>> approach that modules that should be accessable from scenes should
>>> register with them then I guess the answer is no. But I can see
people
>>> wanting to be able to access the GlobalRegistry from Region
modules
> and
>>> trying to do hacks so they can.
>>>
>>> --- On Thu, 26/2/09, Melanie <melanie at t-data.com> wrote:
>>> From: Melanie <melanie at t-data.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] Comms Manager
>>> To: michaelwri22 at yahoo.co.uk, opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
>>> Date: Thursday, 26 February, 2009, 12:50 PM
>>>
>>> I'd have to see that, but it sounds good.
>>>
>>> Can you illustrate?
>>>
>>> Melanie
>>>
>>> MW wrote:
>>>> Just a though,t but maybe we are trying to be too generic in
> finding a
>>> single interface that meets all needs. We have a plugin
> loader
>> (Mono.addins)
>>> that can quite easily load different plugin types. So by using the
>>> IApplicationPlugin system, we can have them also loading other
plugin
>> types.
>>>>
>>>> If basically we are saying that we want two different
> Module/Interface
>>> registeries (Global and Scene), then there is no reason that as
long
> as
>> all the
>>> plugins only register interfaces with those registeries why we
> can't
>> have
>>> the multiple plugin types. So we have a type (and loader) that is
able
> to
>>> register event handlers so it can be informed about scenes. And we
a
>> loader that
>>> can load the modules from the Grid servers directly.
>>>>
>>>> The loaders would be minor things basically just using
> PluginLoader to
>>> load the plugins.
>>>>
>>>> We could say this increases
> the complexity, but I actually think
> by
>> having
>>> initialisation interfaces that are right for the task that the
modules
> are
>> going
>>> to do makes sense.
>>>>
>>>> --- On Thu, 26/2/09, Melanie <melanie at t-data.com> wrote:
>>>> From: Melanie <melanie at t-data.com>
>>>> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] Comms Manager
>>>> To: opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
>>>> Date: Thursday, 26 February, 2009, 12:36 PM
>>>>
>>>> I don't think Grid and Asset modules need to load into
region servers, and vice versa. At least not by the same interface. That
interchangeability makes other things that are useful almost impossibly complex.
>>>>
>>>> Melanie
>>>>
>>>> Stefan Andersson wrote:
>>>>> No, didn't notice that, but I question why
> Grid or Asset
>> server
>>>> modules should even be aware of that, regardless of how the
IScene
>>> interface
>>>> looks or what types that, in turn, pulls in.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> Stefan Andersson
>>>>> Tribal Media AB
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 12:29:19 +0000
>>>>>> From: melanie at t-data.com
>>>>>> To: opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] Comms Manager
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> note that I used IScene sxclusively?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Melanie
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Stefan Andersson wrote:
>>>>>> > Um, yeah, having 'Scene' as a type in
> anyhting
>>> outside
> of
>>>> the Region will lead to grief.
>>>>>> > > > Suggestion:
>>>>>> > > > > --- OpenSim.Framework: ---
>>>>>> > > > > IGenericModule
>>>>>> > > {
>>>>>> > > Initialise();
>>>>>> > > PostInitialise();
>>>>>> > > }
>>>>>> > > > > --- OpenSim.Region.Framework: ---
>>>>>> > > >
>
>>>>>> > IRegionModule : IGenericModule
>>>>>> > > {
>>>>>> > > OnNewScene();
>>>>>> > > OnSceneRemoved();
>>>>>> > > }
>>>>>> > > > > Best regards,
>>>>>> > Stefan Andersson
>>>>>> > Tribal Media AB
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>>>>> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
>>>>>
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>>>> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
>>>> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>>>> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
>>>> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>>> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
>>> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>>>
>>>
>>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>>> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
>>> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>> _______________________________________________
>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
>> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
>> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing
> list
> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://opensimulator.org/pipermail/opensim-dev/attachments/20090226/7f57128c/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Opensim-dev
mailing list