Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Adding an api layer to isolate Okhttp #3549

Merged
merged 29 commits into from
Dec 16, 2021
Merged

Conversation

shawkins
Copy link
Contributor

@shawkins shawkins commented Oct 26, 2021

Description

This is to address #3547

Lower level implementation details can be discussed here. This will be somewhat long running as there is quite a bit of okhttp usage.

Type of change

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • Feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change
  • Chore (non-breaking change which doesn't affect codebase;
    test, version modification, documentation, etc.)

Checklist

  • Code contributed by me aligns with current project license: Apache 2.0
  • I Added CHANGELOG entry regarding this change
  • I have implemented unit tests to cover my changes
  • I have added/updated the javadocs and other documentation accordingly
  • No new bugs, code smells, etc. in SonarCloud report
  • I tested my code in Kubernetes
  • I tested my code in OpenShift

@centos-ci
Copy link

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

@shawkins
Copy link
Contributor Author

For simplicity the proposed changes to BuildConfigOperationsImpl produce a more verbose error message on all exceptions, not just IOExceptions related specifically to the writing the inputstream.

@shawkins shawkins force-pushed the okhttp branch 2 times, most recently from 5f8c8e2 to 669b451 Compare October 29, 2021 18:25
@shawkins
Copy link
Contributor Author

shawkins commented Oct 29, 2021

This should be mostly* working up to the kubernetes-tests. I haven't yet pulled some of the deprecated methods off of DefaultKubernetesClient and related. Other than that the only remaining direct references to okhttp in non-test code are in the io.fabric8.kubernetes.client.internal.okhttp package.

The HttpClientUtils will need broken apart. The are some utility methods that need to be free of okhttp, like the creation of basic credentials. There is also the init logic for okhttp which will need to be encapsulated through a service/factory

OpenIDConnectionUtils - needs to be rewritten in terms of the new api, or if support gets bumped to java 11 could just be directly written for the java 11 client. *Related to this, the TokenRefreshInterceptorTest has been disabled for now.

I've been writing a java 11 implementation on the side. There are a couple of pain points that may require a few additional tweaks to the api layer.

this allows moving openid logic away from okhttp
@shawkins
Copy link
Contributor Author

shawkins commented Nov 2, 2021

Everything other than the TokenRefreshInterceptorTest has been prepped for the separation of the okhttp dependency.

There are still other test dependencies to okhttp - but that is allowable, or at the least can be removed later.

@manusa @rohanKanojia @iocanel can you see if what has been done so far makes sense? The new api is an amalgam of the okhttp client usage and the java 11 apis - it obviously still needs documented more thoroughly.

I do have an implementation using java 11 - see https://github.com/shawkins/httpclient The obvious pain point is adding the interceptor pattern - which needs to also cover websocket requests. The java api completely hides that from the user, so the Interceptor interface in the new api is stripped down as much as possible. One minor issue is that it's not fully non-blocking as the calls to refresh the tokens will be blocking - but I think that can be addressed if needed. I have not yet added a similar createHttpClient method - not all config properties will be applicable, and some of the logic will end up moving to a common spot back in HttpClientUtils..

TODOs have been added anywhere that needs additional thought. Another thing to note is that the adapt logic for the openshift client has been made to piggy-back more on the main configuration.

I have not yet made the client available from the config, I would like to tackle that after the initial work is done.

okhttp

# Conflicts:
#	kubernetes-client/src/main/java/io/fabric8/kubernetes/client/dsl/base/BaseOperation.java
#	kubernetes-client/src/main/java/io/fabric8/kubernetes/client/dsl/base/OperationContext.java
@shawkins shawkins force-pushed the okhttp branch 2 times, most recently from f6255d9 to 14d3b9f Compare November 3, 2021 05:11
@maxandersen
Copy link

I raised this pr in quarkus chat - details at https://quarkusio.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/187038-dev/topic/kubernetes.20client.20okhttp.20isolation - but summary is:

With a Java 11 enabled http client we can always use https://docs.oracle.com/en/java/javase/11/docs/api/java.net.http/java/net/http/HttpClient.Builder.html#executor(java.util.concurrent.Executor) to wire in a vert.x/quarkus based executor so the same thread/execution model is used. Simplifies configuration and avoids unnecessary thread creation.

It would be nice to have a vert.x http client natively implemented so even in native compiled apps we can strip out even more classes; but that is secondary. Big win not having to deal with okhttp at least :)

So from Quarkus perspective we should be fine here and we can evolve from this point.

@shawkins shawkins force-pushed the okhttp branch 3 times, most recently from 9207f96 to 33772fb Compare November 3, 2021 20:43
okhttp

# Conflicts:
#	kubernetes-itests/src/test/java/io/fabric8/kubernetes/CustomResourceDefinitionIT.java
Copy link
Collaborator

@metacosm metacosm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, hopefully we will be able to wire in a vert.x client in a not-so-distant future! 😉

@shawkins
Copy link
Contributor Author

shawkins commented Dec 9, 2021

LGTM, hopefully we will be able to wire in a vert.x client in a not-so-distant future!

Hopefully - I did start down that path, but quickly got bogged down - #3547 (comment) Maybe there is someone on their team who could pick that up if they want to go beyond the jdk impl.

@shawkins shawkins changed the title WIP to isolate Okhttp Adding an api layer to isolate Okhttp Dec 9, 2021
@shawkins shawkins marked this pull request as ready for review December 9, 2021 22:17
@shawkins
Copy link
Contributor Author

shawkins commented Dec 9, 2021

On the 4 sonarcloud bugs https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=fabric8io_kubernetes-client&open=AXziolikSmmHNwo2Qbf6&pullRequest=3549&resolved=false&types=BUG - 3 are with the usage of the WritableByteChannel. Since we close the underlying streams, there's no need for an additional close. I'm just using that logic to write out the ByteBuffer. We also need a reference to the underlying streams to perform a flush - that is not done through a WritableByteChannel. It would probably be a good idea to add flushes to the error calls - I can do it with this pr or separately.

On the other one the isPresent call is there. It probably just doesn't like multiple calls to previousResponse

this makes sure the factory is the primary abstraction for creating
clients
@shawkins
Copy link
Contributor Author

@manusa it probably goes without saying, but feel free to squash this as the individual commits at this point don't convey much. alternatively I can rebase it if you want.

Copy link
Member

@rohanKanojia rohanKanojia left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Great effort, Thanks a lot! 🏋️‍♂️

@metacosm
Copy link
Collaborator

Great effort, Thanks a lot! 🏋️‍♂️

Herculean effort, indeed! 💪🏼

@manusa
Copy link
Member

manusa commented Dec 15, 2021

@manusa it probably goes without saying, but feel free to squash this as the individual commits at this point don't convey much. alternatively I can rebase it if you want.

The commit history for the PR is not adding much value at this point. I do think it's better if we squash.

@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

SonarCloud Quality Gate failed.    Quality Gate failed

Bug E 4 Bugs
Vulnerability D 5 Vulnerabilities
Security Hotspot E 1 Security Hotspot
Code Smell A 22 Code Smells

28.6% 28.6% Coverage
2.4% 2.4% Duplication

Copy link
Member

@manusa manusa left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM
Awesome job, thank you very much!

@manusa manusa merged commit 7ef49cd into fabric8io:master Dec 16, 2021
@manusa
Copy link
Member

manusa commented Dec 16, 2021

A basic check with JKube worked OK, everything appears to work as intended 🚀

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants