ode-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Matthieu Riou" <matthieu.r...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Late binding vs. early binding
Date Thu, 14 Jun 2007 17:49:33 GMT
Should be.

On 6/14/07, Alex Boisvert <boisvert@intalio.com> wrote:
>
> +1 and if we can get this to happen during the scope of
> DeploymentService.deployPackage(...) that's even better.
>
> alex
>
>
> On 6/14/07, Matthieu Riou <matthieu.riou@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Currently when you deploy a process, very little gets loaded to save
> > memory
> > (some people deploy a lot of processes without using them all). This
> > kind of
> > goes with the dehydration but it's just that the default for now is to
> > never
> > fully load a process as long as it's not used.
> >
> > However this has some side effects. Mostly you can never be sure after
> > deployment that your process is fully okay, including the services that
> > it
> > should invoke. Because the messaging layer loads the WSDL only at first
> > invocation, you might get a nasty error there saying that the services
> > declared in your deploy.xml don't exist at all in your WSDL. Which is
> > usually true but it's the kind of things you'd rather find out at
> > deployment
> > time.
> >
> > I'm going to change that a bit so that projects get "hydrated" at
> > deployment
> > if no specific dehydration policy is defined. This way people who don't
> > care
> > about lazy process loading can find out early about the problems their
> > processes might have. And those who care about the memory footprint can
> > still set an hydration policy and enjoy the lazy loading.
> >
> > Anybody against this? Shout quick because I'm going to do that right now
> > :)
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Matthieu
> >
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message