avalon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Stephen McConnell" <mcconn...@apache.org>
Subject RE: project status 'n stuff
Date Sat, 23 Feb 2002 10:12:35 GMT

Leo Simons wrote:
> a few observations:
> - we have a DB
> - we have an FTP server
> - we have an event driven server architecture in the works
> - we have something called overlord and I can't really figure
>   out what it does
> - we no longer like Poolables for some reason?
> - we no longer like ComponentManager/Selector??

More specifically we don't like "Component" as a type 
constraint on a method parameter.

> - phoenix is working pretty well, the thing it really needs now
>   being better management options


> ------
> I've been reading the archives on the ServiceManager discussion,
> but am quite failing to follow it all. What is the problem, what
> is the solution, do we agree on that yet and what will be the
> migration path?

The ComponentManager problem:

  The ComponentManager family of interfaces use Component 
  as a type that constrains objects that are supplied to be 
  derived from the Component maker interface.  This artefact
  meant that many "components" (note the lowercase usage) 
  found in the real world (e.g. CORBA service, components, 
  applications, AltRMI, etc.) had to be wrapped within 
  something implementing Component.

The issues raised in the process:

  Several proposal were made towards solutions which resulted
  in deeper discussions about the semantics of component 
  management and pooling.  The subject of the addition of a 
  token argument on the lookup and related operations was 
  raised, chewed over, and eventually dropped as too-hard now
  given the concurrent discussion on the semantics of the 
  XxxxManager release operation.  The "release" operation
  caused a lot of discussion because there we some that
  felt that the manager should always be notified of the 
  release of an object acquired through lookup, and others that
  felt that the client should be explicitly aware of release 
  obligations.  This discussion did not reach a conclusion.

The result:

  A proposal for ServiceMangager that basically paralleled 
  the ComponentManager was agreed to is now in the framework
  service package.  Some of us are already using Serviceable 
  in anger in our own projects and it has also been picked up
  in a least two outside projects since inclusion in the 

> I read up on SEDA, and really like it. Berin, you encountered
> problems with implementing it?
> Finally, I think Paul and Pete have been looking at all the
> management stuff. Is there any work still going on atm? Where
> are we at?

Waiting for your return ?

> good to be back :-)

Good to have you back!


To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>

View raw message