US 6,067,559 AGrant
Server Architecture for Segregation of Dynamic Content Generation Applications Into Separate Process Spaces
Issue Date:2000-05-23
•30 Claims
•8 Drawing Sheets
Abstract
A server architecture has a server program to receive client requests and multiple applications to process the requests. Each application comprises a collection of agents that can be invoked to process the requests and an application manager that manages the collection of agents. The agents within the associated collection are independent from, but dynamically accessible by, the application manager. Depending on the request, the application manager selects one or more agents to generate content to be returned to the client. An application manager director manages the application managers and facilitates delivery of the client requests from the server program to the suitable application. The application managers are independent from, but dynamically accessible by, the application manager director. For a given request, the director selects the appropriate application manager to handle the request. The application manager, in turn, selects the appropriate agent to process the request. The director can be implemented as part of the server program. The applications, including the agents and associated application managers, can be run either in-process or out-of-process with the server program.
Metadata
Assignee
- Microsoft Corporation
Inventors
- James E. Allard
- Mark T. Anders
- Lei Jin
- David L. Kaplan
- Murali R. Krishnan
- Seth B. Pollack
- Andrew Sigal
Application Information
Application Number:US 0667420
Filing Date:1998-04-23
Priority Date:1998-04-23
Art Unit:278
Classifications
IPC:
G06F 1300
Field of Search:
709707100;101;102;107;202;203;217;219;223;225;226;300;302;303;30410;100;103;104;501
Patent Drawings (8 sheets)
Description
Technical Field
This invention relates to servers for computer network systems. More particularly, this invention relates to a server architecture that implements a dynamic content method for generating client responses.
Background of the Invention
A computer network system has one or more host network servers connected to serve data to one or more client computers over a network. FIG. 1 shows a simple computer network system 20 with a single host network server 22 connected to serve data to a client 24 via a network 26. The client 24 sends a request for data and/or services to the server 22 over the network 26. The server 22 processes the request and returns a response over the network 26. If the request is for data, the server 22 accesses a database 28 to retrieve the requested data 30 and returns the data 30 as part of the response.
The client-server system 20 is representative of many different environments. One particular environment of interest is the Internet. The server 22 runs a Web server software program that accepts requests from client-based programs (e.g., browsers) and returns data 30 in the form of Web pages or documents to the client 24. The Web pages are commonly written in HTML (hypertext markup language) and XML (extensible markup language). Web pages are transmitted using conventional network protocols, such as TCP/IP (Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol), HTTP (Hypertext Transfer Protocol) and DCOM (Distributed Component Object Model). The client 24 executes a browser or other application to render the Web page into human-perceptible forms. A Web document might include text, images, sound, video, active code, and so forth.
Documents served from a server to client are typically generated using either or both of two methods: a static content method and a dynamic content method. In a static content method, the document is created in advance and stored statically on a server database. When a client requests the document, the server retrieves the document and transmits it over the network to the client. FIG. 1 is an example in which the server retrieves the static data 30 from database 28 and serves the data to the client 24. It is further noted that conventional servers, and particularly Web servers, may be configured to push the content to the client without receiving a request. The static content method has an advantage of minimizing the user's perceived response time, meaning the time between requesting the document and seeing it rendered on a computer screen. It has a disadvantage that all users who request the document receive exactly the same content. With static content, the server cannot respond to specific user requests or personalize a document for individual users.
In a dynamic content method, the document is generated dynamically by the server. When a client requests a document, the server invokes one or more agents, feeding the agents relevant parameters from the user's request (such as the user's name). The agent(s) generate the document that satisfies the user's request and the server returns the document over the network to the client. The dynamic content method has the advantage of responding to specific user requests or personalizing content for individual users. It has the disadvantage that the user's perceived response time will generally be longer than with static document requests. This is because the document generation process involves additional time to invoke the appropriate agent(s) and generate the document.
The server generates dynamic content documents by invoking an agent in one of two ways: an "out-of-process" method and an "in-process" method. In an "out-of-process" method, the agent runs in its own process and address space, separate from the server's process and address space. Typically, the out-of-process method uses the industry-standard common gateway interface (CGI) as the communication mechanism between the server and agent. CGI is described in a publicly available document on the Web at http://hoohoo.ncsa.uiuc.edu/cgi. In an "in-process" method, the agent runs within the Web server's process and address space. The in-process method typically uses a vendor-specific application programming interface, like the Internet Server Application Programming Interface (ISAPI) implemented by Internet Information Server (IIS), which is available from Microsoft Corporation. The ISAPI technology is described in more detail in a document at http://www.microsoft.com/iis/Support/iishelp/iis/misc/documentation.asp.
To illustrate the two dynamic content methods and how they can be used in conjunction with the static content method, consider a scenario in which the server 22 runs a Web server for an online retail company. When the client 24 first accesses the Web site, the server 22 might retrieve a pre-existing home page for the company from the database 28 and serve that page to the client 24. This initial step is an example of a static content method. From the home page, the client might request to view an online catalog of products offered by the company. In response, the Web server might invoke a catalog agent to guide the user through various product offerings. When the user decides to purchase a product, the client submits an order request. In response, the Web server might invoke an order agent to assist the user in ordering the product. The steps involved with actively serving a catalog or taking an order are examples of dynamic content methods. They both involve dynamic generation of documents in response to input received from the client.
FIG. 2 shows an "out-of-process" method under this scenario. The server 22 runs a Web server 40 as process 1. The Web server 40 handles the incoming requests from the client. When the client first hits the Web site, the Web server 40 retrieves the company's home page 42 from the database 28 and transmits the home page 42 to the client. When the client sends an order request, the Web server 40 initiates an order manager 44 to assist the user with ordering the desired product or service. The order manager 44 is initiated using the CGI technology as a second process 2, which uses a separate process and address space than process 1, as represented by the dashed lines.
When the user selects an item, the order manager 44 dynamically generates an order document 46 that contains the user's name, a description of the selected item, the cost of the item, and payment terms. The order manager 44 returns the order document 46 to the Web server 40, which then serves the document 46 to the client. Afterwards, the order manager 44 is terminated and the second process 2 is halted.
The out-of-process method shown in FIG. 2 has an advantage in crash prevention and recovery. If the out-of-process order manager 44 is unreliable and ultimately crashes, it will not cause the Web server 40 to crash. However, the out-of-process method has a disadvantage in that a particular agent must be loaded into memory each time a request arrives for it. Using CGI technology, the agent must also be unloaded from memory once it finishes the request. This loading and unloading consumes resources, resulting in a relatively slow response time. Another problem compounding the slowness is that the out-of-process method involves cross-process communication between processes 1 and 2, including such activities as marshalling, messaging, and the like.
A variation of CGI, known as FastCGI, allows the server to keep the agent loaded, rather than terminating the agent each time it responds to a particular request. FastCGI is an improvement over CGI in that it saves the per-request invocation overhead, thereby improving the response time. However, the FastCGI is still run in a separate process, and hence the drawbacks associated with cross-process communication remain. A more detailed discussion of FastCGI is found at http://www.fastcgi.com/kit/doc/fastcgi-whitepaper/fastcgi.htm.
FIG. 3 shows an "in-process" method under the same scenario of the online retail company. In this case, when the client sends an order request, the Web server 40 initiates an order manager 48 to assist the user with ordering the desired product or service. The order manager 48 is initiated using the ISAPI technology to run within the same process 1 as the Web server 40. That is, the Web server 40 and the order manager 48 use the same process and address space designated by the server. When the user selects an item from the online catalog, the order manager 48 dynamically generates an order document 50 that contains the user's name, a description of the selected item, the cost of the item, and payment terms. The order manager 48 returns the order document 50 to the Web server 40, which then serves the document 46 to the client. The order manager 48 can remain loaded for other requests, or terminated when desired.
The in-process method is advantageous in that a particular agent need only be loaded into memory once, when the first request arrives for it. The agent can then remain in memory within the server's process and address space, and can handle additional requests that arrive for it. The in-process method has a further advantage in that there is no need for cross-process communication. As a result, the in-process method is comparatively faster than the out-of-process method. However, the in-process method has the disadvantage that if the agent is unstable and crashes, it will cause the server to crash too.
Most large Web sites and many smaller ones deliver one or more applications in the traditional information system sense. A site that supports catalog shopping, library browsing or database access will typically consist of many separate agents and documents that together implement the site's "capplication"; in other words, the unified experience presented by the Web site to the user. The developer of such a site needs a mechanism to organize an application's software components to enforce consistency, compatibility, version control, and other requirements across components. It is also desirable to construct high performing agents because they often provide the most appealing content delivered by the Web site. The agents are often required to process more than their proportionate share of user requests. Agents that perform slowly may cause users to abandon a Web site because they become frustrated with slow response times, no matter how appealing the content might be.
A Web site developer is also interested in protecting the site against system or process crashes. A Web server can host many Web applications. The applications may be hastily developed and, while effective at certain tasks, may perform unpredictably when subjected to high volume or wide variety of user requests at an active Web site. If not guarded against, such unpredictable applications may bring down the entire site. Accordingly, a developer would like to be able to isolate "trusted" components (i.e. components that are fully tested, debugged, and judged to be crash proof in normal operation) from non-trusted components.
Another advantage of isolated application is that you can stop and unload application components from memory without interfering with the operation of the Web site. Stopping an isolated application is an extremely convenient way to install new components because you don't have to stop and restart the web server to stop and restart an application.
Accordingly, there is a need in the industry to further improve the dynamic content methods for serving documents and other data to clients. There is a need to develop an architecture which enables Web site developers to create high performing agents, to organize the agents in functional groups for optimal performance at a given Web site, and to design isolation between the trusted agents and the non-trusted agents.
Summary of the Invention
This invention concerns a server architecture that improves dynamic content methods for generating client responses. The architecture groups processing agents into functional collections according to their underlying functionality. Thus, agents can be grouped according to the applications supported by the server. As an example, a designer of a Web site is able to group agents that process requests to navigate a catalog into one collection, and agents that process requests for ordering into another collection, and agents that process requests for customer service into a third collection.
The server architecture provides a managerial hierarchy to manage the agents and to control how the client requests are handled. An application manager manages each collection of agents. The agents within the associated collection are independent from, but dynamically accessible by, the application manager. Depending on the request, the application manager selects one or more agents to generate content to be returned to the client. In this manner, the application manager and associated agents under its control form an application, such as a catalog application, an ordering application, a customer service application, and so forth.
An application manager director manages the application managers. The application managers are independent from, but dynamically accessible by, the application manager director. Depending on the request, the director selects the appropriate application manager to handle the request, which in turn selects the appropriate agent to process the request. According to the managerial hierarchy, the director first decides which server application is best suited to handle the incoming request, and then the application manager within the chosen server application decides which specific agent should process the request.
The director can be implemented as part of the general server software. The separate server applications (i.e., the agents and associated application managers) can be run either in-process or out-of-process with the server software. An in-process application offers higher performance at the risk of crashing the system if one agent performs unreliably. An out-of-process application affords high reliability and crash protection at the expense of lower performance due to cross-process communication.
The server architecture allows a designer to separate trusted agents from non-trusted agents. Trusted agents and their application manager can be run in-process with the server software to improve performance. Meanwhile, non-trusted agents and their application manager can be run out-of-process from the server software until they prove themselves reliable. If the non-trusted agents ultimately prove to be trusted, they can be moved in-process with little adaptation.
Brief Description of the Drawings
The same reference numbers are used throughout the figures to reference like components and features.
FIG. 1 is a diagrammatic illustration of a client-server system.
FIG. 2 shows a Web server software program executing on a server computer, and an out-of-process agent invoked by the Web server to dynamically generate a document in response to a client request, according to conventional techniques.
FIG. 3 shows a Web server software program executing on a server computer, and an in-process agent invoked by the Web server to dynamically generate a document in response to a client request, according to conventional techniques.
FIG. 4 shows a server software architecture according to an aspect of this invention.
FIG. 5 shows a block diagram of a server computer used to implement the server software architecture.
FIGS. 6-8 show steps in a method for handling client requests according to another aspect of this invention.
Detailed Description
FIG. 4 shows a server software architecture 60, which executes on a server computer, to facilitate client-server sessions between the server computer and a remote client computer (not shown). The architecture 60 is particularly well suited for accommodating dynamic content sessions in which the server dynamically generates and serves a response that is tailored to client. The architecture 60 may be implemented in a number of server environments. For purposes of discussion, the architecture 60 is often described in the exemplary context of an Internet setting, wherein the server program is configured as a Web server at a Web site on the Internet. However, aspects of this invention are not restricted to the Internet environment, but may include other contexts including client-server LANs (local area networks), interactive television, and so forth.
The server architecture 60 includes a server software program 62 that executes on a computer to receive requests from clients and return responses to those clients. An example of a server software program 62 is the Microsoft Internet Information Server (IIS), which runs on a server operating system such as Microsoft Windows NT. Microsoft IIS and Microsoft Windows NT are well known software products from Microsoft Corporation.
The architecture 60 also includes one or more application managers (AMs), as represented by application managers 64(1), 64(2), and 64(3). Each application manager 64 instantiates an "application" developed to run in conjunction with the server 62. Each application manager 64 manages one or more agents 66 that implement the functionality underlying the application manager 64. Conceptually, the application manager 64 is a dynamic processor of client requests that uses one or more agents to generate content to be returned to the client. The application manager 64 dynamically loads associated agents 66 as needed to handle particular user requests. The application manager 64 can handle an arbitrary number of user requests at a time, and it can load and maintain an arbitrary number of agents 66 into its address space in order to process user requests.
Consider a Web related example, in which the server 62 is configured as a Web server. One application manager 64(1) might be a catalog shopping application containing a first agent 66(1,1) that queries an inventory database to compose catalog pages, a second agent 66(1,2) that presents the user with an order form, and so forth. A second application manager 64(2) might be customer service application containing a first agent 66(2,1) that composes a series of help pages, a second agent 66(2,2) that handles requests to return merchandise, and so on. A third application manager 64(3) might offer another service supported by the Web server 62.
The application managers 64 may run within the server's process (i.e., in-process), or within its own separate process (i.e., out-of-process) either on the same machine as the server or on a different machine. In FIG. 4, application managers 64(1) and 64(2) are in-process with the server program 62, whereas application manager 64(3) is out-of-process with the server program 62. In-process applications allow maximum efficiency at the risk of bringing down the server in the event that the application is not stable. Alternatively, out-of-process applications are effectively isolated so that if an application fails, it should not affect the running of the server. However, this isolation benefit comes at the cost of lower performance when compared to an in-process application. The server architecture 60 advantageously offers the developers the flexibility to run either or both in-process and out-of-process applications.
In one exemplary implementation, each application manager 64 is embodied as an object using ISAPI technology, and hence can remain loaded, regardless of whether it is in-process or out-of-process with the server 62. Each AM object 64 communicates with an associated agent 66 via an ISAPI interface 68. It is noted, however, that this invention may be implemented using technology other than ISAPI.
The server architecture 60 has an application manager director 70 to manage the application managers 64(1)-64(3) and their agents 66. The AM director 70 determines which application manager 64(1)-64(3) should service a given client request. The AM director 70 also starts and stops the application managers as required by user requests. The AM director 70 can stop, pass, and unload the application managers and agents that are running. Another task of the AM director 70 is to detect when the out-of-process application manager 64(3) has crashed and optionally, to attempt to re-start the failed manager.
The AM director 70 maintains a lookup table 72 listing all active application managers. Entries in this table 72 reference an object for each corresponding active application manager 64(1)-64(3). Table 72 contains an object AMInfo 74(1) and 74(2) for each of the in-process application managers 64(1) and 64(2), and an object AMInfoOOP for the out-of-process application manager 64(3). These objects 74 contain data and parameters to communicate with the associated application managers.
When a client request arrives, the application manager director 70 determines which application manager 64 ought to handle the request. Once an application manger is selected, the AMInfo object associated with the selected application manager creates a new request object 80 containing the data in the client request that will be processed by an agent 66. More particularly, the request object 80 holds request-specific information, such as user name, network connection, callback information, and so forth. The AMInfo object then passes the request object 80 to the AM object 64 for execution.
Numerous request objects can exist simultaneously, as represented by request objects 80(1,1), 80(1,2), and 80(1,3) directed to application manager 64(1), request objects 80(2,1) and 80(2,2) directed to application manager 64(2), and request objects 80(3,1) and 80(3,2) directed to application manager 64(3). In one imaplementation, the AM object 64 invokes a single agent 66 for each corresponding request object 80. However, this condition need not be met in other implementations.
The request objects 80 communicate with the AM objects 64 via a marshalable interface 82. This means that, optionally, the parameters of a method call to the interface 82 of either the AM object 64 or the request object 80 can be copied and passed by value, instead of being passed by reference. Hence, the interface 82 can optionally be used in-process or out-of-process. Marshalling lets the AM director 70 decide at runtime whether to route a request to an in-process or an out-of-process AM object.
Various types of technologies support the marshalable interface 82. As one example, the AM and request objects can be based on COM (component object model) and RPC (remote procedure call) technologies. These technologies provide generic mechanisms for allowing objects to communicate with each other solely through interfaces, with no knowledge of the other object's internal data structure, and optionally across process boundaries.
At the object level, there is little difference whether the AM objects 64 are in-process or out-of-process. The same data is communicated between the request objects 80 and the AM objects 64, regardless of whether there is a process boundary between them. The difference between in-process and out-of-process methods is manifest at the marshalable level. To communicate across a process boundary, as is the case between request objects 80(3,1), 80(3,2) and the AM object 64(3), the marshalable interface 82 might employ either a stub and proxy protocol or RPC. COM, stub and proxy, and RPC are all well known. In addition, the objects might employ other technologies that permit process isolation, such as the DCOM (distributed component object model) technology.
When a request object 80 is handed off to an application manager 64, the application manager 64 creates a corresponding shadow object (SO) 84. The shadow object 84 contains a subset of the data in the corresponding request object 80, along with information on how to report back to the request object. For each active shadow object 84, the application manager 64 invokes a suitable agent 66 to process the request data in the shadow object. If more data from the request is needed, the shadow object 84 returns to the request object 80 to obtain the additional data. From the agent's perspective, it is unaware whether the data is from the shadow object 84, or whether the shadow object had to callback to the request object 80 and obtain the data. The agent 66 passes the results back to the application manager 64, which in turn passes the results to the request object 80.
The application manager director 70, the application managers 64, and the agents 66 form a dynamic content generation system that handles client requests which involve dynamic generation of content. That is, the server 62 will determine what type of response is needed for the request. If a static content response is in order (e.g., serving a home page), the server 62 can bypass this System and simply serve a pre-existing static response to the client. Conversely, if the client request requires something more than pre-existing static data, the server uses the dynamic content generation system to create the appropriate response using the information in the client request.
Tables 1-3 list primary data structure elements for the various objects in the server architecture 60. A data structure for the AM object 64 is shown in table 1.
A data structure for a request object 80 is shown in table 2.
A data structure for a shadow object 84 is shown in table 3.
FIG. 5 shows an example implementation of a server computer 100, which can be used to implement the server architecture 60. The server 100 includes a processing unit 102, a system memory 104, and a system bus 106 that interconnects various system components, including the system memory 104 to the processing unit 102. The system bus 106 may be implemented as any one of several bus structures and using any of a variety of bus architectures, including a memory bus or memory controller, a peripheral bus, and a local bus.
The system memory 104 includes read only memory (ROM) 108 and random access memory (RAM) 110. A basic input/output system 112 (BIOS) is stored in ROM 108.
The server 100 has one or more of the following drives: a hard disk drive 114 for reading from and writing to a hard disk or hard disk array; a magnetic disk drive 116 for reading from or writing to a removable magnetic disk 118; and an optical disk drive 120 for reading from or writing to a removable optical disk 122 such as a CD ROM or other optical media. The hard disk drive 114, magnetic disk drive 116, and optical disk drive 120 are connected to the system bus 106 by a hard disk drive interface 124, a magnetic disk drive interface 126, and an optical drive interface 128, respectively. The drives and their associated computer-readable media provide nonvolatile storage of computer readable instructions, data structures, program modules and other data for the server 100.
Although a hard disk, a removable magnetic disk 118, and a removable optical disk 122 are described, other types of computer readable media can be used to store data. Other such media include magnetic cassettes, flash memory cards, digital video disks, Bernoulli cartridges, random access memories (RAMs), read only memories (ROM), and the like.
A number of program modules may be stored on the hard disk, magnetic disk 118, optical disk 122, ROM 108, or RAM 110. These programs include a server operating system 130, one or more application programs 132, other program modules 134, and program data 136. The operating system 130 is preferably the Windows NT server operating system, although other types of operating systems may be used, such as a UNIX-based operating system. The server architecture 60 shown in FIG. 4 can be incorporated into the operation system 130, or implemented as separate applications 132 or program modules 134.
An operator may enter commands and information into the server 100 through input devices, such as a keyboard 138 and a mouse 140. Other input devices (not shown) may include a microphone, joystick, game pad, satellite dish, scanner, or the like. These and other input devices are connected to the processing unit 102 through a serial port interface 142 that is coupled to the system bus 106, but may alternatively be connected by other interfaces, such as a parallel port, game port, or a universal serial bus (USB).
A monitor 144 or other type of display device is also connected to the system bus 106 via an interface, such as a video adapter 146. The server computer 100 has a network interface or adapter 148, a modem 150, or other means for establishing communications over a network 152.
It is noted that the computer shown in FIG. 5 is just one possible type of computing device that can be used to implement this invention. Other computing devices may also be used to implement the invention.
FIGS. 6-8 show steps in method for handling requests from a remote client. The steps are described in the context of the server architecture illustrated in FIG. 4. These steps are performed by the various software components during execution on the server computer of FIG. 5.
At step 200, the server 62 receives a request from a client. The server 62 analyzes the client request to determine how to satisfy the request (step 202). If the server 62 can satisfy the client request with a static content response, such as serving a pre-existing document, the server 62 will retrieve the static data and serve that data to the client (step 204).
If the server 62 determines that the client request requires a dynamic content response and thus involves invoking an application, the server 62 forwards the request to the application manager director 70 (step 206). The director 70 creates a request object 80 to hold the request data (step 208). The director 70 then determines which application manager 64 should process the request and whether the application manager 64 should be run in-process or out-of-process (step 210).
Once the specific application manager is selected, the application manager director 70 determines whether that application manager is already running (step 212). If not (i.e., the "no" branch from step 212), the director 70 starts the required application manager 64 and adds it to the director's table 72 of active application managers (step 214).
If the application manager is in-process (e.g., AM object 64(1)), the director 70 calls a process function in the AM object 64(1) and passes in an interface pointer to the request object (e.g., request object 80(1,1)) (step 216).
On the other hand, if the application manager is out-of-process (e.g., AM object 64(3)), the director 70 calls an in-process proxy for the out-of-process AM object 64(3) (step 220). The director 70 passes to the proxy the interface pointer to the request object (e.g., request object 80(3,1)) (step 222). The proxy then marshals parameters and makes the cross-process call via COM and RPC to the out-of-process stub for the AM object 64(3) (step 224). COM creates a proxy for the request object 80(3,1) within the out-of-process space (step 226). The AM object's stub un-marshals the parameters and calls the process function in the AM object 64(3), passing in the request object's proxy as one of the parameters (step 228).
The selected application manager (e.g., in-process AM object 64(1) or out-of-process AM object 64(3)) creates a shadow object 84 for the corresponding request (step 230). The application manager 64 increments the reference count of the request object 80 (or proxy, if the AM object is running out-of-process) (step 232), and stores the request object's (or proxy's) interface pointer in the shadow object (step 234).
The application manager 64 determines which agent 66 should be invoked to satisfy the particular request (step 236). The application manager 64 then determines whether the desired agent is already running (step 238). If not, the application manager loads the agent and adds it to the AM object's table of running agents (step 240).
The application manager invokes the selected agent 66, passing it information about the user's request (step 242). The agent 66 then processes the request using the data in the newly created shadow object 84 (step 244).
In the described implementation, the application manager receives any calls made by the agent 66 for server services via the ISAPI callback functions. For example, the agent 66 could call back to read information from or write information to the request's network connection, or get information like user name or browser type for the request. If the application manager is running in-process, the application manager uses the interface pointer to the request object to invoke a method that is appropriate to handle the agent's callback. If the application manager is running out-of-process, the application manager uses the interface pointer to the proxy for the request object to invoke a method appropriate to the agent's callback.
When the agent 66 indicates that it has finished processing the request (e.g., by calling a particular interface to the application manager), the agent passes the results back out to the application manager, which in turn passes the results back to the server 62 (step 248). The application manager 64 destroys the shadow object 84 (step 250) and decrements the reference count of the request object (or proxy) (step 252). When the request object's reference count reaches zero, it destroys itself (step 254).
The server architecture 60 is beneficial in that it allows the flexibility to run an agent or a collection of agents in-process for highest performance, or out-of-process for highest reliability. Even when run out-of-process, the agents and application managers can remain loaded between user requests, thereby improving performance as compared to the conventional load-and-unload of CGI.
One advantage afforded by the server architecture 60 is that a designer can separate trusted agents from non-trusted agents. Trusted agents and their application manager can be run in-process with the server software to improve performance. Meanwhile, non-trusted agents and their application manager can be run out-of-process from the server software until they prove themselves reliable. If the non-trusted agents ultimately prove to be trusted, they can be moved in-process with little or no adaptation.
In addition, the architecture 60 enables developers to organize the applications, as desired, to enforce consistency, compatibility, version control, and other requirements across components.
Although the invention has been described in language specific to structural features and/or methodological steps, it is to be understood that the invention defined in the appended claims is not necessarily limited to the specific features or steps described. Rather, the specific features and steps are disclosed as exemplary forms of implementing the claimed invention.
Claims
We claim:
1. A server system for handling client requests from one or more clients, comprising: one or more agent collections, each agent collection having one or more agents, the agent collections being individually programmed to handle different respective types of client requests; one or more application managers, each application manager being configured to manage a corresponding agent collection and to select a particular agent from the corresponding agent collection to process the client request; and an application manager director to manage the one or more application managers, the application manager director being configured to select a particular application manager and to pass the client request to the particular application manager for processing by the particular agent selected by the particular application manager.
2. A server system as recited in claim 1, wherein the application manager director maintains a table that lists the application managers that are running.
3. A server system as recited in claim 1, wherein said each application manager maintains a table that lists the agents in the corresponding agent collection that are running.
4. A server system as recited in claim 1, further comprising at least two application managers, the application managers being run in-process with one another.
5. A server system as recited in claim 1, further comprising at least two application managers, the application managers being run in separate processes from one another.
6. A server software architecture embodied on a computer-readable medium for implementation on a computer server system, the server software architecture comprising: a server program to receive a client request from a client and return a response to the client; an application manager director to handle the client request in an event that a response to the client request will involve at least some content generation; at least one application manager independent from, but dynamically accessible by, the application manager director; at least one agent independent from, but dynamically accessible by, the application manager, the agent comprising a specialized functionality to process particular types of client requests to generate the response; and upon receiving the client request, the application manager director calls the application manager and passes the client request to the application manager, the application manager calls the agent and passes the client request to the agent, and the agent processes the client request to generate the response.
7. A server software architecture as recited in claim 6, wherein the application manager director creates a request object to hold data from the client request.
8. A server software architecture as recited in claim 7, wherein the application manager creates a shadow object to hold data from the client request.
9. A server software architecture as recited in claim 7, wherein the application manager director, the application manager, and the agent all run in-process with the server program.
10. A server software architecture as recited in claim 7, wherein the application manager and the agent run in a separate process from the server program.
11. A server software architecture as recited in claim 7, further comprising first and second application managers, the first application manager being run in-process with the server program and the second application manager being run in a separate process from the server program.
12. A server software architecture as recited in claim 7, wherein the application manager director maintains a table that lists the application managers that are running.
13. A server software architecture as recited in claim 7, wherein said each application manager maintains a table that lists the agents that are running.
14. A dynamic content generation system embodied as computer program modules on a computer-readable medium, the dynamic content generation system being implemented in a server connected to serve one or more clients, the dynamic content generation system comprising: code means for receiving a client request from a client; code means for selecting an application manager based on an application manager's functionality from a set of multiple application managers having different defined functionalities, the application managers being capable of running in process or out of process; code means for passing the client request to the selected application manager; code means for selecting an agent to process the client request; code means for passing the client request to the selected agent; code means for processing the client request at the selected agent to dynamically create content that forms a response to the client request; and code means for transferring the response back to the client.
15. A server operating system comprising the dynamic content generation system as recited in claim 14.
16. A server computer system comprising: a processing unit; a memory subsystem; a server program stored in the memory subsystem and executed on the processing unit to receive client requests; and multiple applications stored in the memory subsystem and executed on the processing unit either in-process or out-of-process with the server program to dynamically generate responses to the client requests, each said application comprising one or more agents to process the client requests and an application manager to manage the one or more agents, individual applications having different programmed functionalities; and an application manager director to facilitate delivery of the client requests received by the server program to the applications that are appropriate for processing the client requests, whereupon receiving a specific client request, the application manager director selects a particular application manager based upon an application's functionality and forwards the specific client request to the particular application manager, and the particular application manager selects a particular agent and forwards the specific client request to the particular agent for processing.
17. A server computer system as recited in claim 16, wherein the application manager director maintains a table that lists the application managers that are running and that indicates whether the application managers are in-process or out-of-process.
18. A server computer system as recited in claim 16, wherein the application manager maintains a table that lists the agents that are running.
19. A server computer system as recited in claim 16, wherein: the application manager director creates request objects to hold data contained in the client request; and the application managers create shadow objects for corresponding request objects, the shadow objects holding at least a subset of the data contained in the request objects.
20. A server operating system for execution on a server that is configured to serve one or more clients, the server operating system being implemented with a dynamic content generation system for handling an HTTP request that involves dynamic generation of content based on data included in the HTTP request, the dynamic content generation system having a managerial hierarchy comprising an application manager director, one or more application managers that are dynamically accessible by the application manager director to handle the client request, and one or more agents grouped in accordance with predefined agent functionalities and in association with the application managers and dynamically accessible by the associated application managers to dynamically generate the content in response to the HTTP request.
21. A computer-executable application manager object embodied on a computer-readable medium for execution on a server computer, the server computer running a server software program to receive and process client requests from one or more clients and to return responses to the client requests, the application manager object comprising: a flag field to hold data indicating whether the application manager is in-process with the server software program or out-of-process with the server software program; a list of the client requests that are currently being processed; a table identifying one or more agent programs that are currently running to process the client requests on the list; and code means for selecting the agent programs for processing the client requests.
22. An application manager object as recited in claim 21, wherein the code means includes code means for starting an agent program.
23. A method for handling client requests, comprising the following steps: receiving a client request from a client; selecting an application manager suitable for handling the client request; passing the client request to the selected application manager; selecting an agent to process the client request, the agent having a programmed functionality that is associated with the type of client request that is received; passing the client request to the selected agent; processing the client request at the selected agent to dynamically create content that forms a response to the client request; and transferring the response back to the client.
24. In a server system having a hierarchic managerial architecture comprising an application manager director, one or more application managers that are dynamically accessible by the application manager director, and one or more agents grouped in association with the application managers and dynamically accessible by the associated application managers, a method for handling a client request comprising the following steps: creating a request object to hold data from the client request; identifying an application manager from a set of multiple application managers; calling the identified application manager; creating a shadow object in correspondence with the request object, the shadow object holding at least a subset of the data contained in the request object; identifying an agent from a set of multiple agents; and invoking the identified agent; processing, within the identified agent, the data contained in the shadow object to create a response; returning the response; and destroying the shadow object.
25. A method as recited in claim 24, wherein the calling step comprises the step of calling an out-of-process application manager.
26. A method as recited in claim 24, further comprising the step of destroying the request object after said step of destroying the shadow object.
27. A method as recited in claim 24, further comprising the step of tracking the application managers that are running.
28. A method as recited in claim 24, farther comprising the step of tracking the agents that are running.
29. A method as recited in claim 24, further comprising the step of managing the agents and the application managers that are running.
30. A method as recited in claim 24, farther comprising the step of stopping, passing, and unloading the agents and the application managers that are running.