On Thursday 01 Mar 2007, Chris Scott wrote:
> I totally do not agree with this approach. For one thing, Tom, why
> would you need to bounce the server? You should be able to just
> reinit your app. Unless you are working off of a production system,

My app has state stored in the other beans (lists of logged in users session 
tokens, for instance).
I don't want to kick them all out just because we've made a minor change in 
the backend code.

> and I don't see why you would do this. When Mark brought this up
> before I realized that he was looking for a ColdSpring solution to a
> Reactor issue, not actually a ColdSpring issue. You change a bean
> managed by ColdSpring, and I understand you want to reload it, but
> the reason really is you do not want to wait for Reactor to

In my case, the bean isn't Reactor, though we do have a normal ReactorFactory 
bean, and Reactor is in production mode.

The use case that brought this up was we had a new version of an app to 
deploy, and the only change was that some of the constants in a bean had 
changed. These are stored as static bean properties to keep performance up. 
If we'd been able to ask ColdSpring to re-read that one bean, we could have 
done that, rather than bouncing ColdFusion or reiniting the application - 
both of which would reload all the beans, clearing the list of logged in 
users and making the monitoring system go 'beep' :-)

> I don't mean this in a harsh way, but messing with ColdSpring core
> files is a really bad idea. I have stuff to be committed that you
> have just written yourself out of, and believe me we are talking
> serious productivity enhancements.

In our case, we *could* extend the DefaultXmlBeanFactory to add a 
removeFromSingletonCache() as Mark suggested as we've not got Mach-II to 
worry about.
However, if ColdSpring 1.1 (or 2.0 :-) ) is going to render this approach 
totally intractable, we'll have to look at things again.
Maybe we could refactor the state we don't want to loose when ColdSpring 
restarts out of the bean variables and into the Application scope, for 
instance.

I *totally* understand where you are coming from, and no, it wasn't taken as 
harsh.

-- 
Tom Chiverton
Helping to completely synergize open-source functionalities
On: http://thefalken.livejournal.com

****************************************************

This email is sent for and on behalf of Halliwells LLP.

Halliwells LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and 
Wales under registered number OC307980 whose registered office address is at St 
James's Court Brown Street Manchester M2 2JF.  A list of members is available 
for inspection at the registered office. Any reference to a partner in relation 
to Halliwells LLP means a member of Halliwells LLP. Regulated by the Law 
Society.

CONFIDENTIALITY

This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may be 
confidential or legally privileged.  If you are not the addressee you must not 
read it and must not use any information contained in nor copy it nor inform 
any person other than Halliwells LLP or the addressee of its existence or 
contents.  If you have received this email in error please delete it and notify 
Halliwells LLP IT Department on 0870 365 8008.

For more information about Halliwells LLP visit www.halliwells.com.


Reply via email to