Thanks John. That is very helpful. Doug
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 5:33 PM, John Mettraux <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 02:16:46PM -0700, Doug Bryant wrote: > > > > Is it detrimental over time or considered bad practice not to close out a > > workflow? We have a case where where a workflow may need to to be > executed > > several months or years (unlikely) after it started. > > Hello Doug, > > no, it should be OK. > > > Is it okay to leave the workflow on a StorageParticipant step for very > long > > periods of time? Will that effect ruote in any way as far as > performance or > > upgrading goes? Anything we should take into consideration? > > Performance should not be affected, storage implementations take care to go > directly to the information they need (ie not iterating over mostly > sleeping > info). > > For upgrading, I try to offer a smooth upgrading experience. When an > upgrade > path is bad, I inform people in this mailing list (that is, when I can't > make > newest ruote versions to deal with older data formats). > > It should be OK. Document what you do well, make the information circulate > in > your team, have a staging environement always at hand when trying stuff... > > > Best regards, > > -- > John Mettraux - http://lambda.io/jmettraux > > -- > you received this message because you are subscribed to the "ruote users" > group. > to post : send email to [email protected] > to unsubscribe : send email to > [email protected] > more options : http://groups.google.com/group/openwferu-users?hl=en > -- you received this message because you are subscribed to the "ruote users" group. to post : send email to [email protected] to unsubscribe : send email to [email protected] more options : http://groups.google.com/group/openwferu-users?hl=en
