Hi Shazni, You should return a new Embedded Registry instance per call. The whole point of having lazy loading inside the Embedded Registry is to get rid of the expensiveness, :).
Regards, Senaka. On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 6:36 AM, Shazni Nazeer <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Senaka and all, > > I've been able to introduce lazy loading on EmbeddedRegistry as I stated > above. Further as the next step I removed AXIOM dependency on XML parsing > and used DOM instead and tested the change. > > I think what remains is getting rid of UserRegistry and other deprecated > classes. As the next step I'm going to remove UserRegistry, hence UserRealm > from UserStore. > > Now in this process I need to clarify few things. > > Are we going to have only the EmbeddedRegistry in the code? > > It's recommended to have only one EmbeddedRegistry in general for all > operations per application (there are exceptions when the application needs > to connect to different data sources). So if we are going to have only the > EmbeddedRegistry, every time a registry instance is requested, are we going > to return a new Embeddedregistry, which is going to be expensive? > > I hope the answer is No. In that case, we need to have a wrapper Registry > for EmbeddedRegistry and use it to keep the information like the 'chroot' > and tenantId. > > WDYT? > > regards, > > Shazni Nazeer > > Senior Software Engineer > > Mob : +94 715 440 607 > LinkedIn : http://lk.linkedin.com/in/shazninazeer > Blog : http://shazninazeer.blogspot.com > > > On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 10:57 AM, Shazni Nazeer <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Senaka, >> >> Yes, the current code is in GitHub. You can clone the current code at >> https://github.com/shazni/Repository.git >> >> I'll go through the staged process that you are suggesting. I can >> introduce lazy loading into EmbeddedRegistry. The reason I told >> GhostRegistry is dependant on UserRegistry was that, AFAIU, GhostRegistry >> does lazy loading only on UserRegistry, but not on EmbeddedRegistry in the >> C4 code. It doesn't lazy load EmbeddedRegistry. EmbeddedRegistry get loaded >> initially with EmbeddedRegistryService. But IMO, even that needs to be lazy >> loaded and I'll do what you are suggesting. >> >> And then, we are in the last stage of removing AXIOM (by introducing DOM) >> and then UserRegistry and finally all the other deprecated code. These >> three tasks will be done step by step, but it will certainly affect the >> platform and IMO is ok because we are in the last step. I'll try to be >> online at the said time to have a chat on this. >> >> regards, >> >> Shazni Nazeer >> >> Senior Software Engineer >> >> Mob : +94 715 440 607 >> LinkedIn : http://lk.linkedin.com/in/shazninazeer >> Blog : http://shazninazeer.blogspot.com >> >> >> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 11:30 PM, Senaka Fernando <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi Shazni, >>> >>> Please do this in a staged process. As of now, is the code you worked on >>> so far in GitHub? Also, after that's done, you can remove the axiom >>> dependency, and integrate ghost registry into embedded registry without >>> removing user registry. Basically, write a new ghost registry logic inside >>> the embedded registry and validate the lazy loading logic, and convert the >>> existing ghost registry class to simply a wrapper that invokes the user >>> registry. This way, you would move the logic to the right level without >>> impacting the existing functionality. Did you get what I mean? If you want >>> to clarify further over skype/g-talk, I'm online between 10.30-11.30am LKT. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Senaka. >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Shazni Nazeer <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Senaka, >>>> >>>> Hoping you are reading the mail. >>>> >>>> I've currently removed RemoteRegistry and integrated CacheBackRegistry >>>> with EmbeddeRegistry. And at this state I ran the integration test cases >>>> and it passes with similar figures as I shared earlier. >>>> >>>> What remains to do is follows, >>>> >>>> - Removing the AXIOM dependency and using DOM to parse the >>>> configuration. >>>> - Removing the UserRegistry >>>> - Integrating GhostRegistry (This is dependant on UserRegistry, so >>>> have to do with UserRegistry removal) >>>> - Removing the marked deprecated things like Comments, Tags. >>>> >>>> I think from this point onwards the platform is going to be completely >>>> broken, as it's highly dependant on these. I'll keep a copy of the code of >>>> the current status and thought of moving forward in doing the above 4 step. >>>> >>>> WDYT??? >>>> >>>> Shazni Nazeer >>>> >>>> Senior Software Engineer >>>> >>>> Mob : +94 715 440 607 >>>> LinkedIn : http://lk.linkedin.com/in/shazninazeer >>>> Blog : http://shazninazeer.blogspot.com >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> *[image: http://wso2.com] <http://wso2.com> Senaka Fernando* >>> Senior Technical Lead; WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.com >>> >>> >>> >>> * Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://apache.org >>> <http://apache.org>E-mail: senaka AT wso2.com <http://wso2.com>**P: +1 >>> 408 754 7388 <%2B1%20408%20754%207388>; ext: 51736*; >>> >>> >>> *M: +94 77 322 1818 <%2B94%2077%20322%201818> Linked-In: >>> http://linkedin.com/in/senakafernando >>> <http://linkedin.com/in/senakafernando>*Lean . Enterprise . Middleware >>> >> >> > -- *[image: http://wso2.com] <http://wso2.com> Senaka Fernando* Senior Technical Lead; WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.com * Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://apache.org <http://apache.org>E-mail: senaka AT wso2.com <http://wso2.com>**P: +1 408 754 7388 <%2B1%20408%20754%207388>; ext: 51736*; *M: +94 77 322 1818 <%2B94%2077%20322%201818> Linked-In: http://linkedin.com/in/senakafernando <http://linkedin.com/in/senakafernando>*Lean . Enterprise . Middleware
_______________________________________________ Architecture mailing list [email protected] https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
