Issue 5965: Should be able to create Applications dynamically (deployment-ftf) Source: Raytheon (Mr. Gerald Lee Bickle, Gerald.L.Bickle(at)raytheon.com) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: Should be able to create Applications dynamically solely based upon the Component Package Description. Submission was to address both static and dynamic deployment. Only static being addressed in specification based upon existing deployment plan. A system can determine how to deploy the component based upon the component's deployment requirements and domain target environment capabilities. Recommendation is to add an Application Factory concept that is associated with a Component Package Description that can create an application that determines the deployment plan dynamically. The Application that gets created is the same Application type created from a Domain Application Factory. This deployment behavior was in the previous CCM specification and in the current SCA. The appropriate name for this should be Domain Application Factory but this is name already in use the specification. I suggest renaming Domain Application Factory to a different name since it is based upon a specific deployment plan, so this name can be used for above behavior. The above Application Factory concept could be used to support any deployment plan since it has to obey the component package description Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: June 18, 2003: received issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== Subject: Deployment Issues To: issues@omg.org Cc: deployment-ftf@omg.org, swradio@omg.org X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.8 June 18, 2001 From: Gerald_L_Bickle@raytheon.com Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 08:35:48 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on NotesServer3/HDC(Release 5.0.12 |February 13, 2003) at 06/18/2003 08:38:39 AM X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by amethyst.omg.org id h5IDjfkM021179 Initial Deployment Issues: 1. Should be able to create Applications dynamically solely based upon the Component Package Description. Submission was to address both static and dynamic deployment. Only static being addressed in specification based upon existing deployment plan. A system can determine how to deploy the component based upon the component's deployment requirements and domain target environment capabilities. Recommendation is to add an Application Factory concept that is associated with a Component Package Description that can create an application that determines the deployment plan dynamically. The Application that gets created is the same Application type created from a Domain Application Factory. This deployment behavior was in the previous CCM specification and in the current SCA. The appropriate name for this should be Domain Application Factory but this is name already in use the specification. I suggest renaming Domain Application Factory to a different name since it is based upon a specific deployment plan, so this name can be used for above behavior. The above Application Factory concept could be used to support any deployment plan since it has to obey the Subject: Proposed resolution for issue 5965 Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 10:55:30 -0500 Thread-Topic: Proposed resolution for issue 5965 Thread-Index: AcPsyaTtUIE4SZrnTSSG4E+yWTZWRQ== From: "Pilhofer, Frank" To: X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by amethyst.omg.org id i16FmpJN004649 We discussed this issue during teleconferences long ago, and revisited it at the Anaheim meeting. We agreed that the functionality of "online planning" is possible with the existing building blocks. The OP suggested that in this case, as a further optimization, the online planner need not compose a deployment plan, but immediately executing the application itself, by contacting node managers directly, essentially incorporating the functionality of the Execution Manager. At the meeting, we agreed that having the Execution Manager as a separate compliance point is essential for interoperability, and that the deployment plan is thus needed as interchange format. To resolve this issue, we decided to add a paragraph to the "Actors" chapter, to outline the possibility of integrating planning and execution, while clarifying that such a setup would be non-compliant. Proposed resolution: In chapter 7.7, "Deployment Actors Overview," add the following paragraph: A proprietary implementation of the deployment system could merge planning and execution functionality in a single actor, immediately executing components, based on online planning, by directly using the NodeManager interface, without creating a DeploymentPlan. Such an implementation would not expose the ExecutionManager interface but could still use off component package description.