Well, I am by no means an expert, but these are my 2 cents, and they certainly won't harm.
>Since a few days we are switching our Project from ECM to Phoenix 4.0.1. The >first components we tested worked just fine but now we seem to hit some >subtle semantic differences that cause us some trouble: This implies, that your problem is NOT rooted in a a general incompatibility with the concepts endorsed by the Avalon Framework, but rather Phoenix specific. Is that right? >2. All components are instantiated and even started before lookup. > This seems to block everything else because the start (or execute) > methods of my components usually do a lot of work and are sometimes > supposed to be started in an own thread (which would exist when > lookup is done). So we are talking components, not blocks, right? (Referring to one of your latter postings) There seem to be two kinds of components (well, there will be more;)) in your application: A) Components that are amenable to the Phoenix way of instantiating and managing them, e.g. components that are inexpensive at startup time. B) Components that are VERY expensive to instantiate and initialize, thus causing Phoenix to block at startup. It appears to me - judging from your remarks and the discussion that ensued - that these must not be managed by Phoenix directly. My first thought when reading this was: 1. Leave those components that do no harm to be managed by Phoenix directly. 2. Instead of writing a factory for those expensive components, why not let them be managed by the Excalibur Component Manager (or a custom derivative, if more applicable), which is - after all - a component that could, in turn, be managed by Phoenix? Whenever some component needs to instantiate an expensive component, it would ask the component manager provided by Phoenix for your custom component manager, asking the latter for the component you could have been asking for in the first place, if this was the best of all possible universes;) It appears, that this is not so far off your component factory, but would relieve you from the burden of explicit lifecycle management. There is a further level of indirection in here, in that the Phoenix configuration for your component manager would probably have to encapsulate the configuration(s) the components managed by it, but that might be acceptable. On the other hand, this might totally break the Phoenix way of component mangement. I am not at all acquainted with its innards, so cannot decide this. As you will notice, I have never actually worked with Phoenix and only just started working with ECM, so all of this might be complete rubbish. But who knows? It might help. >I hope somebody can help me with this. Hope this does. A bit. Regards, Olaf -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:avalon-users-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:avalon-users-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
