On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 02:39:07PM -0800, Matthew York wrote: > > (...) > > goal was to provide some redundancy. > The processes queuing up work for ruote are behind activeMQ, so I suppose > there is still redundancy even if I end up splitting the 2 workers to use > separate storage. > > Rather than troubleshoot ruote-mon I was thinking about trying the redis > provider to see if it exhibits the same behavior. > For now I'll move ahead with a single worker & attempt to find whatever > other issues I may be having with the process definitions themselves. > > Later on if I want to continue to troubleshoot is > using http://ruote.rubyforge.org/noisy.html the only way to go? I recall > having issues trying to get this to work.
Hello, I can't remember you mentioning having trouble with getting noisy to work ;-) I used(d) noisy a lot when developing expression and when debugging process definition. Along with test/rspec it's great to see what a worker is doing. When there are two workers working on the same process instance, the noisy output gets split, making it difficult to interpret without some shuffling. Best regards, John -- -- 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 Google Groups "ruote" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
