Re: 0.91 Memory Footprint

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We recently migrated our version of Tuscany from M2 to 0.91, and we noticed that the memory consumption seems to have increased by quite a bit. When doing memory profiling, the culprit appeared to be classes related to Xerces DOM (DeferredElementNSImpl, several other

Dynamic registration of databindings, was: 0.91 Memory Footprint

Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We recently migrated our version of Tuscany from M2 to 0.91, and we noticed that the memory consumption seems to have increased by quite a bit. When doing memory profiling, the culprit appeared to be classes related to Xerces DOM

Re: Dynamic registration of databindings, was: 0.91 Memory Footprint

Hi, Your proposal looks good. I think it is consistent with the pattern that we use to deal with unresolved models. IMO, the proxy/delegate objects for databindings could be: DataBindingDelegate: className = my.MyDataBinding (or ClassReference?) DataBinding databinding; // transient

Changes to Policy Module

Hi Raymond, I had wrapped up a local increment to the Policy module and tried to check it in. However, I find that there are modifications that you had checked in. With those modifications, the work that I did in policy-xml broke :). I'd need some help to merge what I have done with what you

Re: Changes to Policy Module

Hi, Venkat. I fixed a few related issues and checked the changes into SVN under r562968. * The IntentImpl.hashCode() should be based on the name * Move getRequiredIntents() from Intent to ProfileIntent * The resolved intent will be kept in the collection before the clear() is called Thanks,

Re: Tuscany vmbuild

Hi, vmbuild1 is now set up. I have created a group for Tuscany but have not added the projects - I thought that individual projects might like to set them up to their liking (though I'm happy to help with anything). If you'd like to register for an account I can give you the group

Re: Dynamic registration of databindings, was: 0.91 Memory Footprint

Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote: Raymond Feng wrote: Hi, Your proposal looks good. I think it is consistent with the pattern that we use to deal with unresolved models. IMO, the proxy/delegate objects for databindings could be: DataBindingDelegate: className = my.MyDataBinding (or

Re: Dynamic registration of databindings, was: 0.91 Memory Footprint

Raymond Feng wrote: Hi, Your proposal looks good. I think it is consistent with the pattern that we use to deal with unresolved models. IMO, the proxy/delegate objects for databindings could be: DataBindingDelegate: className = my.MyDataBinding (or ClassReference?) DataBinding

Re: Changes to Policy Module

Hi Raymond, I looked thro your changes - just the one thing to say - Thanks for taking a look and making those changes :) - Venkat On 8/6/07, Raymond Feng [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Venkat. I fixed a few related issues and checked the changes into SVN under r562968. * The

Re: Tuscany vmbuild

I have created my account : lresende Please give me the administration roles, so I can go ahead and setup it up for Tuscany project builds. On 8/5/07, Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, vmbuild1 is now set up. I have created a group for Tuscany but have not added the projects - I