+1 from me 2007/8/31, Maciej Szefler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > If you have a custom IL, then there will be some small changes > (for the better), otherwise there's no user-visible differences. > > -mbs > > On 8/31/07, Paul Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > +1 to get it merged into trunk and baked. Sounds like good material > > for a 1.2 release. Are there any incompatibilities introduced, i.e., > > will someone's 1.1 setup work (without modification) in 1.2? > > > > -- Paul > > > > On 8/31/07, Maciej Szefler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > With 1.1 all spiced and cured, I'd like to merge BART branch into the > > trunk. > > > As a a reminder (its been a while) the BART branch is a refactor of the > > > engine that provides several benefits: > > > > > > 1. Simplified integration -- in particular it is no longer necessary to > > > start transactions in the IL in order to interface with ODE > > > 2. Support for three different "invocation styles": Unreliable (the > > simple, > > > no tx no guarantees style), Reliable (transacted transport, useful for > > > WS-RM, JMS, and the like), and Transacted (supports atomic invocations). > > > 3. Performance -- caching of instance state to eliminate unnecessary > > > database reads, reuse of message objects in p2p invocations, elimination > > of > > > unnecessary transactions, elimination of unnecessary context switches ( > > i.e . > > > sequential instance work gets done by the same thread). > > > > > > Any objects, comments, suggestions are appreciated. > > > > > > -maciej > > > > > > > > > -- > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://mult.ifario.us/ > > >
-- Tammo van Lessen - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.taval.de
