Sylvain Wallez wrote: >It seems to me that the main benefit of ActiveMonitor is for resources >that are systematically checked at each and every request : IMO, this >should be limited to configuration files and sitemaps. > >For less-frequently used resources, wouldn't it be a better solution to >only call getLastModified() when the resource is actually used and the >time since the last call to getLastModified() is greater than the >refresh period ? This would be a kind of buffering in front of the >filesystem. Also, can't this be integrated directly in Source ? > I am currently experiencing first results with a Docbase Source allowing using Documentum Docbases, and I found that this getLastModified() call can be expensive, too. If a certain amount of requests for a particular resource like a stylesheet or a document arrives, constantly checking back with the Source and subsequently with the Docbase due to the getLastModified() call is more expensive than the overhead plus regularly checking the resources with an ActiveMonitor.
I am definitely in favor of integrating the ActiveMonitor usage within a Source; the question is how/when/where to decide between directly checking on each request and Active Monitoring ? >Last point : your changes in ProgramGenerator make the assumption that >sources are files. This won't be true in unexpanded war files and will >very likely break the engine ;) > One more point in favor of integrating Active Monitoring into the Source. Best regards, Michael Hartle --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
