I am now thinking about a workflow system such like the one hosted at Werken or the one from OfBiz. But by the time I get there (probably a month), I will probably change my mind agian:)
Anyone had experience about using those with Avalon services/components?
Will you guys support SEDA or a regular workflow system?
regards,
david
On Sunday, March 2, 2003, at 02:32 AM, Clemens Marschner wrote:
I wrote something on Lucene-dev:
AFAIK Seda was developed for asynchronous I/O, which would mean a redesign
of the central FetcherTask class. If every thread downloads 50 files at
once, you only need a couple of them in parallel to saturate the network
interfaces.
Clemens
----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Donald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Avalon framework users" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2003 4:44 AM Subject: Re: [LARM] using SEDA, pros and cons
Any follow up on this?
On Tue, 18 Feb 2003 14:53, David Worms wrote:This email was originaly send earlier today, but I got an delivery error so I'm sending it again to a new address (using old email address). It was also send to the lucene-dev mailing list
In order to move our project to the next level, it has been discussed the use of an SEDA architecture.
With the help of the Excalibur / Event library, I created a simplified
version of Larm which use SEDA as its backbone architecture. The goal
was not to make it pretty or even working, but to see how each
application components could feet in an event stage architecture.
The great thing I notice is how flexible the application become. it is
extremely easy to map each stage with the others. One of the features
of LARM is the ability to have different sources( db, web, filesystem,
... ), process them, and store them (lucene index, log, ...). This
seems easily achieveable with SEDA. Also clustering the LARM could be
done through a specific stage implementation.
This was for the pros. However, it will be great to get some feedback because I am really not sure on how to deal with SEDA. here is some problems I am facing.
- In order for the crawler to be efficient, I had to raise the number of threads, but from what I read in the past, only one or two threads should be used in a SEDA environment.
- Also, it looks to consume a lot of memory, which could be due to the
number of messages put into the queue.
Clemens, and others, please have a look of it, and give me some feedback.
http://67.116.155.180/~wdavidw/stage.zip
David.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Cheers,
Peter Donald Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd. -- Voltaire
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
