其他人已经详细概述了OSGi的好处，我在此解释我所见过或使用过的实际用例。

In one of our application, we have event based flow and flow is defined in plugins based on OSGi platform so tomorrow if some client wants different/additional flow then he just have to deploy one more plugin, configure it from our console and he is done. It is used for deploying different Store connectors, for example, suppose we already have Oracle DB connector and tomorrow mongodb is required to be connected then write a new connector and deploy it and configure the details through console and again you are done. deployment of connnectors is handled by OSGi plugin framework.

我发现OSGi有以下好处:

每个插件都是一个版本化的工件，它有自己的类加载器。 每个插件都依赖于它所包含的特定jar和其他特定版本的插件。 由于版本控制和隔离的类加载器，同一工件的不同版本可以同时加载。如果应用程序的一个组件依赖于插件的一个版本，而另一个组件依赖于另一个版本，那么它们可以同时加载。

这样，您就可以将应用程序构建为一组按需加载的版本化插件构件。每个插件都是一个独立的组件。就像Maven帮助您构建构建，使其可重复，并由创建它的工件的一组特定版本定义一样，OSGi帮助您在运行时完成这一点。

I don't care too much about the hotplugability of OSGi modules (at least currently). It's more the enforced modularity. Not having millions of "public" classes available on the classpath at any time protects well from circular dependencies: You have to really think about your public interfaces - not just in terms of the java language construct "public", but in terms of your library/module: What (exactly) are the components, that you want to make available for others? What (exactly) are the interfaces (of other modules) you really need to implement your functionality?

这很好，热插拔是附带的，但我宁愿重新启动我通常的应用程序，而不是测试所有的热插拔组合…

在它的官方网站上已经有了一个很有说服力的声明，我可以引用

OSGi技术如此成功的关键原因是它提供了一个非常成熟的组件系统，实际上可以在数量惊人的环境中工作。OSGi组件系统实际上用于构建高度复杂的应用程序，如ide (Eclipse)、应用服务器(GlassFish、IBM Websphere、Oracle/BEA Weblogic、Jonas、JBoss)、应用程序框架(Spring、Guice)、工业自动化、住宅网关、电话等等。

至于开发商的利益?

开发人员:OSGi通过为当今大规模分布式系统和小型嵌入式应用程序提供模块化体系结构来降低复杂性。从内部和现成的模块构建系统可以显著降低复杂性，从而降低开发和维护费用。OSGi编程模型实现了基于组件的系统的承诺。

请参阅使用OSGi的好处。

我使用OSGi已经有8年左右的时间了，我不得不说，只有当你有业务需要在运行时更新、删除、安装或替换某个组件时，你才应该考虑使用OSGi。这也意味着您应该有一个模块化的心态，并理解模块化的含义。有一些争论说OSGi是轻量级的——是的，这是真的，但也有一些其他的框架是轻量级的，更容易维护和开发。同样的道理也适用于安全java等等。

OSGi需要一个可靠的体系结构才能正确使用，而且在没有任何OSGi参与的情况下，很容易使OSGi系统成为一个独立可运行的jar。

我还不是OSGi的“粉丝”…

我一直在财富100强公司使用企业应用程序。最近，我们使用的产品已经“升级”为OSGi实现。

启动本地cba部署… [2/18/14 8:47:23 727 EST] 00000347 CheckForOasis

最终部署，“以下包将暂停，然后重新启动” 00000143 AriesApplicat I CWSAI0054I:作为应用程序更新操作的一部分

51分钟……每次代码改变…以前的版本(非osgi)在旧的开发机器上部署不到5分钟。

在一台有16g内存和40g空闲磁盘和Intel i5-3437U 1.9 GHz CPU的机器上

The "benefit" of this upgrade was sold as improving (production) deployments - an activity that we do about 4 times a year with maybe 2-4 small fix deployments a year. Adding 45 minutes per day to 15 people (QA and developers) I can't imagine ever being justified. In big enterprise applications, if your application is a core application, then changing it is, rightly so (small changes have potential for far reaching impacts - must be communicated and planned with consumers all over the enterprise), a monumental activity - wrong architecture for OSGi. If your application is not an enterprise application - i.e. each consumer can have their own tailored module likely hitting their own silo of data in their own silo'd database and running on a server that hosts many applications, then maybe look at OSGi. At least, that is my experience thus far.