An alternative is to persist a workflow in XML as a file. Certainly fast enough for me! Pat.
> From: John Mettraux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: <[email protected]> > Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 07:31:38 +0900 > To: anselmo silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[email protected]> > Subject: [openwferu-users] Re: Workflow for AEC industry. > > > Hi Anselmo, > > 2007/5/22, anselmo silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >> >> Our base Technology. >> Ruby and the Rails framework. >> >> Call Context. >> We deal with Business Process Modeling and change calls every week. We >> thought and still think that this is a straight case for a simple/robust >> Workflow engine implementation. >> Ok here comes the hardest part, and the reason for this call. >> >> When we try to implement a workflow engine using rails framework, we design >> a solution with constant database persistence (any new process is directly >> mapped in the database). Everything is Mysql mapped. We don't have a >> workflow engine and there´s nothing at the memory. >> We have a workflow factory class (with a mapped workflow manager table), a >> Process class (with a mapped Process Table), an Activity class (with is >> mapped activity table), an Assignment Class (with is mapped worklist table). >> >> At this moment i take a break for a higher architecture view. I don't feel >> comfortable with this solution, there's to much queries, and too much >> confusion at the rails level( workitems , resources, ahhrrrrhh) >> >> >> >> My Two Questions are (and since you have a great background with workflow >> engines, ehhh ehhh ): >> >> Do you feel/think/know if is possible to implement a performance workflow >> architecture based on our Factory Class (Mysql constant persistence)? > > I don't know what you expect in terms of performance, but I guess that > ActiveRecord does the handle the caching of the entities for you so > you don't worry too much (except if you hit the database directly, > working around ActiveRecord...) > > Anything specialized is usually more performant than something > generic. Java is more performant than Ruby (currently), but Ruby code > is usually easier to develop and maintain, so the performance cost is > easily forgotten. You could draw a parallel for a workflow engine. > > >> Shall we go with your OpenWFEru or try to build something more "Rails" Like >> ? > > You should build a quick prototype and then decide. Maybe the > OpenWFEru approach is not for you (sudo gem uninstall openwferu). > > > Best regards, > > -- > John Mettraux -///- http://jmettraux.openwfe.org > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenWFEru users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/openwferu-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
