git.net

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: A "Kamel" crazy idea


In order to actually start the route, I forgot to add the required
parameter:

gnodet•camel/platforms/graalvm*(*graalvm*)*»
./example/target/org.apache.camel.graalvm.main -r
org.apache.camel.graalvm.example.SimpleCamelRouteBuilder

[main] INFO org.apache.camel.graalvm.FastCamelContext - Apache Camel
2.23.0-SNAPSHOT (CamelContext: camel-1) is starting

[main] INFO org.apache.camel.graalvm.FastCamelContext - StreamCaching is
not in use. If using streams then its recommended to enable stream caching.
See more details at http://camel.apache.org/stream-caching.html

[main] INFO org.apache.camel.graalvm.FastCamelContext - Route: route1
started and consuming from: file://./target/orders

[main] INFO org.apache.camel.graalvm.FastCamelContext - Total 1 routes, of
which 1 are started

[main] INFO org.apache.camel.graalvm.FastCamelContext - Apache Camel
2.23.0-SNAPSHOT (CamelContext: camel-1) started in 0.012 seconds

Note that the binary is quite big: 26 Mb. One of the reason is that it
contains the whole camel-core code.  This is because the components /
languages / dataformats are loaded dynamically, so the graalvm tool has to
be informed of the implementation classes that can be discovered.
Currently, all of them from camel-core are included, but I think a better
way would be to discover them through the route model and only include the
ones that are needed.  I'll work on that.

Le jeu. 2 août 2018 à 00:18, Luca Burgazzoli <lburgazzoli@xxxxxxxxx> a
écrit :

> That’s very nice start, thx Guillaume
>
> On Wed, 1 Aug 2018 at 20:15, Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > I've pushed a branch with graalvm experiments.
> >    https://github.com/apache/camel/tree/graalvm
> > In order to build the project, you need to use the GraalVM jdk and use
> the
> > following ~/.m2/toolchains.xml adapted to your path:
> >
> > <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF8"?>
> >
> > <toolchains>
> >
> >   <toolchain>
> >
> >     <type>jdk</type>
> >
> >     <provides>
> >
> >       <version>1.0.0-rc4</version>
> >
> >       <vendor>oracle</vendor>
> >
> >       <id>graalvm-ee-1.0.0-rc4</id>
> >
> >     </provides>
> >
> >     <configuration>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> <jdkHome>/Users/gnodet/Downloads/graalvm-ee-1.0.0-rc4/Contents/Home/</jdkHome>
> >
> >     </configuration>
> >
> >   </toolchain>
> >
> > </toolchains>
> >
> > Build and run:
> >  gnodet•camel*(*graalvm*)*» cd platforms/graalvm
> >  gnodet•camel/platforms/graalvm*(*graalvm*)*» mvn install
> > ...
> >  gnodet•camel/platforms/graalvm*(*graalvm*)*»
> > ./example/target/org.apache.camel.graalvm.main
> >
> > [main] INFO org.apache.camel.graalvm.FastCamelContext - Apache Camel
> > 2.23.0-SNAPSHOT (CamelContext: camel-1) is starting
> >
> > [main] INFO org.apache.camel.graalvm.FastCamelContext - StreamCaching is
> > not in use. If using streams then its recommended to enable stream
> caching.
> > See more details at http://camel.apache.org/stream-caching.html
> >
> > [main] INFO org.apache.camel.graalvm.FastCamelContext - Total 0 routes,
> of
> > which 0 are started
> >
> > [main] INFO org.apache.camel.graalvm.FastCamelContext - Apache Camel
> > 2.23.0-SNAPSHOT (CamelContext: camel-1) started in 0.006 seconds
> >
> >  Guillaume
> >
> > Le mar. 31 juil. 2018 à 09:44, Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@xxxxxxxxxx> a
> > écrit :
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Le lun. 30 juil. 2018 à 17:49, Nicola Ferraro <ni.ferraro@xxxxxxxxx> a
> > > écrit :
> > >
> > >> Hi Cameleers,
> > >> it seems from the comments that this "Kamel" subproject is something
> we
> > >> want to start and I think that also the main camel core will benefit
> > from
> > >> the new features it will bring.
> > >>
> > >> I would like to donate the current "Kamel" code to Apache Camel, in
> > order
> > >> to have a initial brick to start from.
> > >>
> > >> From your reactions, the name "Kamel" seems cool and I'd like to keep
> > it.
> > >> However if you talk to people about the "Kamel" project, they won't
> > >> understand if you're talking about "Kamel with the K" or "Camel with
> the
> > >> C".
> > >> For this reasons I propose to keep "Kamel", but also use "Camel K"
> > [ˈkæməl
> > >> keɪ] as friendly name when talking about it. This is in line with the
> > >> repository we should create for the subproject, that needs to start
> with
> > >> "camel-" (it will be "apache/camel-k" in that case).
> > >>
> > >> These days I've been experimenting different ideas with Luca
> Burgazzoli.
> > >> In
> > >> particular, there have been some concerns here on the power of a
> > >> declarative DSL (a new one or the existing XML one) and we've found a
> > >> strategy that will allow us to use also the Java DSL in Kamel
> > >> integrations.
> > >> Without adding too many details here, at integration build time we can
> > run
> > >> the user code in a build container and inspect the produced routes to
> > get
> > >> metadata for the optimizer. This is one of the first things we should
> do
> > >> next.
> > >>
> > >> This possibility of running code that produces integrations opened a
> lot
> > >> of
> > >> unexpected paths, that I've written down in the project roadmap (
> > >> https://github.com/nicolaferraro/integration-operator) and summarized
> > >> below.
> > >>
> > >> One nice feature (kudos to Luca) is that we can simplify life for
> Kamel
> > >> users up to the point that they'll just need to write their routes on
> a
> > >> Java file and run them with e.g.:
> > >> "kamel run Routes.java"
> > >>
> > >> Where "kamel" is a binary we release within the project. Kubernetes
> > custom
> > >> resources will be used under the hood, but the "kamel" binary is a
> > utility
> > >> that will provide a user experience comparable to that of current
> > >> serverless platforms (or even better).
> > >>
> > >> But there's not just that.
> > >>
> > >> Luca wrote this weekend a prototype for having a polyglot Camel (
> > >> https://github.com/lburgazzoli/camel-routes-loader).
> > >>
> > >> With that, you will be able to e.g. write integrations in groovy and
> use
> > >> the same Kamel engine:
> > >> "kamel run routes.groovy"
> > >>
> > >> But also JavaScript:
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://github.com/lburgazzoli/camel-routes-loader/blob/ca986541f7c422ee02c21727cdfe4293d64a364e/src/test/resources/ext/camel/routes.js#L2
> > >>
> > >> This is a prototype right now, but a similar approach based on GraalVM
> > has
> > >> a lot of potential, because users can not only use their preferred
> > >> language
> > >> to write routes and processors, but also bind them to functionalities
> > >> available in their preferred libraries.
> > >>
> > >> How much this will be feasible depends on the adoption of GraalVM, but
> > I'm
> > >> seeing many frameworks adding metadata to make GraalVM work with
> > >> reflection. We've also done some work in Camel, there are some Jiras
> for
> > >> it
> > >> and first tests made by Guillaume signal that it's something feasible,
> > at
> > >> least for the Camel core and a subset of components. GraalVM would be
> > >> important also to reduce memory footprint and improve startup time, as
> > >> already said.
> > >>
> > >
> > > I'll continue experimenting and I'll report back.
> > > I did some initial experiments leveraging some modifications I did  to
> > > speed up the start up time [1] and on a single route [2].
> > > There may be some limitations down the road of course, but at least it
> > > shows that it's feasible. Fwiw, the experiments lead to a startup time
> of
> > > 14 ms compared to a few hundreds milliseconds (roughly 680 with [1]).
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> If the GraalVM approach works (it is working for other frameworks),
> > >> instead
> > >> of rewriting a subset of Camel in Go (as the original proposal
> > mentions),
> > >> we can just sanitize and recompile our existing codebase: this way we
> > >> fully
> > >> leverage the strength of Apache Camel.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Right, if we can avoid rewriting Camel, that would be much better !
> > >
> > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-12688
> > > [2]
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/gnodet/openwhisk-runtime-camel/blob/master/camel-openwhisk-example/src/main/java/org/jboss/fuse/openwhisk/camel/example/SimpleCamelFunction.java
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Another important thing in the roadmap is actually how we'll integrate
> > >> with
> > >> current FaaS platforms. We will evaluate together if it's better to
> > have a
> > >> tighter integration with some of them or to leverage knative for some
> > >> aspects of Kamel...
> > >>
> > >> But, let's get started!
> > >>
> > >> Il 19 lug 2018 10:45, "Nicola Ferraro" <ni.ferraro@xxxxxxxxx> ha
> > scritto:
> > >>
> > >> It's clear to me that we need to add support for our existing XML DSL,
> > >> that
> > >> is powerful. But there are multiple reasons why I'd like to also
> "add" a
> > >> limited yaml/json notation to "Kamel".
> > >>
> > >> The first one (and simplest) is that json/yaml is the primary encoding
> > for
> > >> all resources exchanged with the Kubernetes API server. I'm not saying
> > >> that
> > >> for this reason the Integration resource cannot contain a XML
> > >> (/Java/Ballerina) section, but from a pure presentational point of
> view,
> > >> having the possibility to write simple use cases (even a "hello
> world")
> > in
> > >> pure json/yaml is better than always requiring a mix of json and XML.
> > >>
> > >> The second one is simplicity. Writing a optimizer (the module that
> > >> materializes the integration into running code, choosing a specific
> > >> runtime
> > >> and configuration) for a turing-complete language like Java is not
> easy:
> > >> even if you manage to create a good parser, it may be able to do
> > >> optimizations only if you write routes in a particular way, without
> > >> complex
> > >> constructs.
> > >> XML is ok from this point of view. The thing is that both json/yaml
> and
> > >> XML
> > >> are just two different ways to serialize object trees, that can be
> then
> > >> statically analyzed.
> > >> The point is not XML vs json/yaml, it's more about tailoring a new
> > >> minimalistic DSL to the emerging use cases vs proposing "only" our
> > classic
> > >> way of writing integrations. I think XML can be the "advanced" way. We
> > can
> > >> experiment optimizations easily with the new DSL, and enable them also
> > on
> > >> XML if it's worth.
> > >>
> > >> Scripting should be part of the spec, but I'd try to use programming
> > >> languages only for processing/transformation, not for the route
> > >> definition.
> > >>
> > >> Third one is performance. Apart from the fact that json parsers are in
> > >> general said to be faster than XML parsers... Given the "fast startup"
> > >> target that we want to reach, we may think e.g. to translate the new
> DSL
> > >> into Java or Go code, then compiling it. This allows doing parsing at
> > >> build
> > >> time in order to avoid it on startup. This kind of improvements are
> much
> > >> easier with a limited DSL but much more difficult with a existing
> > >> fully-fledged DSL..
> > >>
> > >> Nicola
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 11:51 PM Pontus Ullgren <ullgren@xxxxxxxxx>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > I also like the idea but with some comments.
> > >> >
> > >> > As Hiram Chirino I'm not sure YAML/JSON is the best language for
> this.
> > >> > Perhaps a more fluent DSL like the Camel Java DSL or perhaps
> something
> > >> like
> > >> > Ballerina language would be better suited ?
> > >> > Also in my experience even simple integrations, that is simple real
> > >> world
> > >> > integration and not just hello world demos, requires
> > >> > you to add one or more Java class or scripting in addition to the
> core
> > >> > components. So for it to be useful there must be some way to add
> > custom
> > >> > code in some way for aggregation/enrichment strategies.
> > >> >
> > >> > If you go with a GO implementation I would also like some fallback
> for
> > >> > using Java since I find it unlikely that the existing base of
> > components
> > >> > will be ported any time soon.
> > >> >
> > >> > As for the name as other I like the "Kamel"  name however a being a
> > >> newborn
> > >> > kotlin fan I know of one pre-existing project with that name
> > >> > that is close enough to allow for potential confusion.
> > >> > https://github.com/topicusoverheid/kamel
> > >> >
> > >> > Looking forward to see the result.
> > >> >
> > >> > // Pontus
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 at 15:15 Hiram Chirino <hiram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Love the idea.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Personally, I'd keep using the existing Camel XML DSL if possible.
> > >> You
> > >> > can
> > >> > > still embed it in the CRD.  The operator that deploys it could
> > >> inspect it
> > >> > > and figure whats the most optimized runtime that can support the
> > DSL.
> > >> > > Perhaps if it's only using the restricted set of camel components
> > >> > supported
> > >> > > by camel-go (https://github.com/lburgazzoli/camel-go) then is
> uses
> > >> that.
> > >> > > Otherwise it falls back to using camel spring boot.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > For that to work I think we need the different runtime
> > >> implementations to
> > >> > > provide a way to ask them: 'hey do you support running this camel
> > >> route?'
> > >> > > Not a trivial thing to respond to, it might require a build step
> in
> > >> there
> > >> > > for traditional Camel runtimes.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 4:32 AM Antonin Stefanutti <
> > >> > antonin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >> > > wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > Hi Nicola,
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > I love the idea.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > I just wonder whether YAML/JSON is an expressive enough format
> in
> > >> the
> > >> > > long
> > >> > > > term. But as you’ve mentioned, starting simple would enable
> > >> > experimenting
> > >> > > > some very interesting / promising optimisations. So it seems
> worth
> > >> > taking
> > >> > > > that path, instead of trying to embed a complex DSL or the
> > existing
> > >> XML
> > >> > > DSL
> > >> > > > into the CRD.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Definitely +1
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > > On 13 Jul 2018, at 01:30, Nicola Ferraro <
> ni.ferraro@xxxxxxxxx>
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Hi Cameleers,
> > >> > > > > it's now passed some time since I started thinking about a new
> > >> > project
> > >> > > > that
> > >> > > > > we can begin here at Apache Camel, and I'd like to have your
> > >> opinion.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > We've already been targeting cloud-native applications with
> > Camel,
> > >> > > > > especially on top of Kubernetes, that is becoming "the
> standard"
> > >> > cloud
> > >> > > > > platform. But writing a Camel integration and running it on
> > >> > Kubernetes
> > >> > > > > requires some effort: choosing the base platform (spring-boot,
> > >> karaf,
> > >> > > > > simple main?), adding health checks (actuator?), packaging a
> > >> docker
> > >> > > image
> > >> > > > > and creating the Kubernetes resources (fabric8-maven-plugin,
> > >> helm?),
> > >> > > > > publishing the image on a docker registry, then finally
> > deploying
> > >> the
> > >> > > > > resources on a Kubernetes cluster.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > The resulting integration container is then far from being
> > optimal
> > >> > > from a
> > >> > > > > resource consumption point of view: it is likely that a Camel
> > >> > > Spring-Boot
> > >> > > > > application will require at least 200MB of RAM and also some
> CPU
> > >> > shares
> > >> > > > > because of polling threads used by many components.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > In case people use a CI/CD pipeline, it will take also a long
> > >> time to
> > >> > > get
> > >> > > > > from a code update to having a Kubernetes POD up and running.
> > >> > > > > Apart from compilation and image push/pull time, also startup
> > >> time is
> > >> > > > often
> > >> > > > > ~10 seconds for Camel + Spring-Boot in a container with
> standard
> > >> > limits
> > >> > > > on
> > >> > > > > resources, making it difficult to propose this combination for
> > >> > > > "serverless
> > >> > > > > integration" (this term is becoming increasingly more
> popular).
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > So, my proposal is to start to investigate a "more
> cloud-native"
> > >> > > approach
> > >> > > > > to integration: *making Camel integrations first-class
> citizens
> > in
> > >> > > > > Kubernetes, and making them super fast and lightweight.*
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > We can base the project on Kubernetes Custom Resource
> > Definitions
> > >> > (CRD)
> > >> > > > > <
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/extend-kubernetes/api-extension/custom-resources/
> > >> > > > >,
> > >> > > > > for example a Integration CRD and have a Kubernetes "operator"
> > >> > > > > <https://coreos.com/operators/> taking care of:
> > >> > > > > - Optimizing the integration that we want to run
> > >> > > > > - Packaging in a container
> > >> > > > > - Running it on Kubernetes
> > >> > > > > - Managing its entire lifecycle
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > A Kubernetes-native integration may look like:
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > -------------------
> > >> > > > > kind: "Integration"
> > >> > > > > apiVersion: "camel.apache.org/v1alpha1"
> > >> > > > > metadata:
> > >> > > > > name: "example"
> > >> > > > > spec:
> > >> > > > > replicas: 1
> > >> > > > > routes:
> > >> > > > >  - id: timer
> > >> > > > >    route:
> > >> > > > >     - type: endpoint
> > >> > > > >       uri: timer:tick
> > >> > > > >     - type: endpoint
> > >> > > > >       uri: log:info
> > >> > > > > -------------------
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > For those who are not familiar with Kubernetes resources, this
> > >> kind
> > >> > of
> > >> > > > > YAML/JSON resource definitions are really common.
> > >> > > > > The example route is embedded in the Kubernetes resource
> > >> declaration
> > >> > > and
> > >> > > > > follows a basic "flow DSL". We may start from a basic one and
> > >> evolve
> > >> > it
> > >> > > > as
> > >> > > > > new requirements arrive from the community.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > I've made a very simple (but working) POC here:
> > >> > > > > https://github.com/nicolaferraro/integration-operator.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > This idea of a "Cloud-Native Camel" on Kubernetes (project
> > >> codename
> > >> > can
> > >> > > > be "
> > >> > > > > *Kamel*", if you like it :D), will be an enabler for a lot of
> > nice
> > >> > > > features.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > For example, we can propose "Kamel" as "ideal" platform for
> > >> > "serverless
> > >> > > > > integration" (I see many people reinventing the wheel out
> > there):
> > >> the
> > >> > > > > operator can reduce resource consumption of a single
> integration
> > >> by
> > >> > > > > optimizing the runtime and also pause/resume integrations when
> > >> they
> > >> > are
> > >> > > > not
> > >> > > > > used, that is the basic idea behind "serverless" (e.g. think
> to
> > >> > > > > HTTP-triggered integrations, but not only).
> > >> > > > > Focusing on serverless will bring more emphasis on push-based
> > >> > > > notifications
> > >> > > > > (webhooks, cloud events <https://cloudevents.io/>), that are
> > >> rarely
> > >> > > > used in
> > >> > > > > Camel components, that prefer a poll based approach being it
> > >> simpler
> > >> > to
> > >> > > > use
> > >> > > > > in classic deployments, but not so good in the cloud, where
> more
> > >> > > > resources
> > >> > > > > become higher direct costs for the users.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > The presence of the simplified DSL enables also experimenting
> on
> > >> > > > "*reduced*
> > >> > > > > subsets of Camel" implemented in languages other than Java,
> for
> > >> > example
> > >> > > > one
> > >> > > > > language that has a reactive approach on thread scheduling
> and a
> > >> > really
> > >> > > > low
> > >> > > > > memory footprint, like Go.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > But apart from this kind of experiments (that are valid IMO),
> > the
> > >> > > "Kamel"
> > >> > > > > optimizer will have free room to choose the right platform for
> > the
> > >> > > > > integration that the user wants to run, including, in the
> > future,
> > >> > doing
> > >> > > > AOT
> > >> > > > > compilation using Graal/VM (less memory, faster startup) if
> the
> > >> > > features
> > >> > > > > (components) used in the integration are supporting it (maybe
> we
> > >> can
> > >> > > add
> > >> > > > > AOT compilation in the roadmap for Camel 3).
> > >> > > > > A silly optimization: integrations starting from "timer:..."
> may
> > >> be
> > >> > > > > scheduled directly with Kubernetes CronJobs, so they will
> > consume
> > >> > > > resources
> > >> > > > > only when actually running.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Being the final integrations lightweight and being the DSL
> > >> > > > > language-independent, we may see a increased adoption of Camel
> > >> also
> > >> > as
> > >> > > > > agile integration layer for not-only-java applications (both
> > >> "cloud"
> > >> > > and
> > >> > > > > "serverless" applications).
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > I'm the first one that would like to work on a project ilke
> > this.
> > >> > I've
> > >> > > > > worked on many Kubernetes/Openshift based applications and
> > >> frameworks
> > >> > > in
> > >> > > > > the past years, also on operators and CRDs, and I think this
> way
> > >> of
> > >> > > > > redesigning integrations has a lot of potential.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Integrations will not be necessarily limited to the simplified
> > >> DSL,
> > >> > but
> > >> > > > we
> > >> > > > > can add extension points for scripting and even custom
> libraries
> > >> > > > (although
> > >> > > > > limiting the freedom of the optimizer).
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > The most important thing: it may become a great project, since
> > >> it's
> > >> > > > driven
> > >> > > > > by a great community.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > So, what do you think? Is it crazy enough?
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Nicola
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > --
> > >> > > Hiram Chirino
> > >> > > Engineering | Red Hat, Inc.
> > >> > > hchirino@xxxxxxxxxx | fusesource.com | redhat.com
> > >> > > skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > ------------------------
> > > Guillaume Nodet
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > ------------------------
> > Guillaume Nodet
> >
> --
> --
> Luca Burgazzoli
>


-- 
------------------------
Guillaume Nodet