Jonathan Asbell wrote:
>
> Persistent storage is an option too. I was hoping, however to limit calls
> through the enterprise parts and database.
Why?
> You could argue that it belongs
> there because the database is the central location holding all data and
> information and therefore should hold workflow info, especially in the face
> of changing services/activities. However, must I consult the database or a
> db developer each time I want to add, change, or see anything? That is a
> time waster.
Not really. I mean, I guess it's your design requirements. I would
want it to be that a user in a process (or a process itself) has no
requirement of 'immediate completion' - i.e. some part of the flow can
take a while.
So then if the servlet container goes down, I don't care. No state
lost.
>
> If you were not going to use persistent storage, how would you do it?
For what I want to do, i can't really escape it. Somewhere, something
has to remember the state - assume the servlet container is going down
at some point...
geir
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Geir Magnusson Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 10:17 PM
> Subject: Re: Opening up a thread on ALTERNATE SCOPES
>
> > Can I ask why you don't go with persistant storage, like a rdbms? I
> > have been thinking about workflow recently as well, although not
> > specifically w/in struts, and I believe that for the general solution,
> > where someone can come back a long time later and resume, or be it an
> > automated process, persistant storage would be required.
> >
> > geir
> >
> >
> > > Jonathan Asbell wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello all. We were talking about workflow a few weeks ago and the
> > > conversation dissipated. I am trying to open it up again because I
> > > have found a need for more scopes, and a need to implement these new
> > > scopes in the next few months. I am interested specifically in how it
> > > can be implemented in Struts. Let me begin with the new scopes.
> > >
> > > 1) Workflow scope within an application
> > > Store values from the first step until the final step and then get rid
> > > of the values
> > > You could probably use an adaptor, hide implementation from the
> > > developer, and store this scope inside the "session" scope
> > > Example - within an application store a value Do Activity 1, then do
> > > Activity 2, then do Activity 3, then throw out the value
> > >
> > >
> > > 2) Workflow between applications (mentioned by Dan Connelly earlier)
> > > Store values from the first step until the final step and then get rid
> > > of the values
> > > You could probably use an adaptor, hide implementation from the
> > > developer, and store this scope inside the "application" scope
> > > Example - store a value and do Activity 1 in Application 1, then do
> > > Activity 2 in Application 2, then do Activity 3 in Application 3, then
> > > throw out the value
> > >
> > >
> > > 3) Sub-Application scope
> > > Store values that pertain to a sub-directory within an application
> > > You could probably use an adaptor, hide implementation from the
> > > developer, and store this scope inside the "session" or "application"
> > > scope though I'm not sure which would be more appropriate.
> > > Example - Your applcation is a magazine which has 4 different
> > > sections, and you want to store values only pertaining to each
> > > section. When you leave the section the value is not visible, and may
> > > or may not disappear (depending on what you want to do).
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > System and Software Consulting
> > Developing for the web? See http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/
> > You have a genius for suggesting things I've come a cropper with!
> >
--
Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
System and Software Consulting
Developing for the web? See http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/
You have a genius for suggesting things I've come a cropper with!
