on 11/30/01 11:26 AM, "Erik Worth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hi Gang,
> The tricky thing with building a scheduler suitable for workflow is the need
> to schedule tasks in the future (i.e. do this task 10 days from now at 2:35
> PM).  When scheduling future tasks, one needs to persist the schedule.  This
> type of service is also difficult to support in a clustered or fault
> tolerant environment because it is relatively difficult to keep multiple
> instances of the same scheduler in sync so that when the main one (you only
> want one of these scheduling tasks at a time or you get duplicate work
> scheduled) goes down, the other one automatically picks up where the other
> left off.

Turbine's scheduler is persistent with the help of a RDBM's and a simple
table.

-jon


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to