Re: Automating network testing with POE (web services IPC)

Great points and thanks for the advice!  I agree completely that it makes no
sense to plan for a complete change.......I just wanted to make sure I knew
what my options were. I'm creating an automation test framework that may
turn into a complete network management system later....but no need to put
the horse before the carriage.  I think I have seen enough to believe in the
Perl/POE/IKC approach as a very good start.  I can always speed up my actual
IKC::Lite cgi calls with fast cgi or mod_perl on the client side.......and
with the POE server already running the bottleneck probably won't be the
process communication.  I really appreciate the points and the
advice....leading me in a good direction.

On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Nick Perez <[email protected]> wrote:

> Well, obviously, if you are going to be ripping out parts of your
> framework somewhere down the road, then perhaps an all-magical Perl
> application isn't your gig. I mean, sure you make everything talk some
> sort of RPC, and ultimately rip out your workers and reimplement them
> in C using libevent or whatever, but what is the benefit, especially if
> you already have a working all-magical Perl application? If you are
> concerned about performance on the worker end, perhaps you should
> encapsulate it into a simple, C, command-line utility and then have
> your workers interact with it via POE::Wheel::Run. That way the
> communication framework can remain Perl/POE/IKC. Just an idea. I just
> don't see the benefit of including some mythical event of
> reimplementing a component into your design. If you are reimplementing,
> you are likely redoing the whole approach anyway, so this becomes a
> moot point.
>
> On Mon, 20 Apr 2009 18:46:21 -0700
> Josh803316 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Nick, thanks for the help.  IKC seems great for most of this.....what
> > about the future if I wanted to swap out a a perl worker for a C
> > worker? Would I use JSONRPC instead of IKC for my communication?
> > Would it be easy to mix/match?
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 5:47 PM, Nick Perez <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > It really sounds like you need to segregate the webapp from the
> > > actual daemon. And with that, you do not need to run POE within
> > > mod_perl (not that you could anyhow). But you obviously need POE
> > > communication between the web server and the POE daemon. So I
> > > recommend using POE::Component::IKC::ClientLite
> > > (
> http://search.cpan.org/~gwyn/POE-Component-IKC-0.2003/IKC/ClientLite.pm<http://search.cpan.org/%7Egwyn/POE-Component-IKC-0.2003/IKC/ClientLite.pm>
> <http://search.cpan.org/%7Egwyn/POE-Component-IKC-0.2003/IKC/ClientLite.pm
> >
> > > ).
> > > As for worker/controller interaction, IKC can serve those needs too,
> > > without having to involve a protocol layer beyond a TCP socket and
> > > the serializer that IKC uses.
> > >
>
>
> --
>
> Nicholas Perez
> XMPP/Email: [email protected]
> http://search.cpan.org/~nperez/ <http://search.cpan.org/%7Enperez/>
> http://github.com/nperez
>