pyph Deployment Design

Processes and Connections Design

What kind of interface there should be that application or service interacts with peerhood ?

Are the direct connections between applications and services or is the connection provided and multiplexed by peerhood daemons ?

Selection criterias ? By goal.

Applications using, connectivity model impact.

Impact of opportunistic model. Application level messaging in opportunistic model. Transport level messaging in seamless model.

A Language independent connectivity with control channel

  • Language independent, a protocol “api”.

Application independency: Very good.

Controlling the system: Medium. Application have to encode the control channel.

Events from the environment (via system): Medium. Application have to encode the control channel.

Stream connection possible: Good.

Message connection possible: Medium. Message boundaries have to be establish by application.

Message bus support: Medium.

Provide seamless functionality: Good. Application and daemon separation.

Application/service code hosting: Not concerned by the design.

B Library in application process

Application independency: Poor. Need for language depended API.

Controlling the system: Good, if control provided.

Events from the environment (via system): Good, if event system priovided.

Stream connection possible: Good.

Message connection possible: Good. API can provide messaging interface.

Message bus support: Good.

Provide seamless functionality: Good.

Application/service code hosting: Not concerned by the design.

C Direct peer library data connections

Application independency: Poor. Need for language depended API.

Controlling the system: Good, if control provided.

Events from the environment (via system): Good, if event system priovided.

Stream connection possible: Good:

Message connection possible: Good. API can provide messaging interface.

Message bus support: Poor. No common message channel.

Provide seamless functionality: Medium, depends on library.

Application/service code hosting: Not concerned by the design.

D Direct peer application data connections

No supproted connection, but just application made. Might be the case on some special protocols, eg. streaming. Because of architectural limitation or performance limitations (peerhood is not able to provide performance due overhead).

Application independency: Medium. Need for control API, but connection independed.

Controlling the system: Good, if control provided.

Events from the environment (via system): Good, if event system priovided.

Stream connection possible: Medium, depends from application.

Message connection possible: Medium, depends from application.

Message bus support: Poor, no channel,

Provide seamless functionality: Poor, application have to handle it.

Application/service code hosting: Not concerned by the design.

E Language independent direct peer application data connection

Application independency: Very Good.

Controlling the system: Medium. Application have to encode the control channel.

Events from the environment (via system): Medium. Application have to encode the control channel.

Stream connection possible: Medium, depends from application.

Message connection possible: Medium, depends from application.

Message bus support: Poor, no channel,

Provide seamless functionality: Poor, application have to handle it.

Application/service code hosting: Not concerned by the design.