Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 96742 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2003 01:00:10 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (208.185.179.12) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Sep 2003 01:00:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 82256 invoked by uid 500); 4 Sep 2003 00:57:43 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 82171 invoked by uid 500); 4 Sep 2003 00:57:42 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cocoon.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 82021 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2003 00:57:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO pdx3.collegenet.com) (63.74.198.13) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Sep 2003 00:57:40 -0000 In-Reply-To: <000701c371f1$88054690$1e01a8c0@WRPO> To: dev@cocoon.apache.org Subject: RE: dynamic flowscript MIME-Version: 1.0 Sensitivity: X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.0.1 February 07, 2003 Message-ID: From: mratliff@collegenet.com Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 17:42:35 -0700 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on pdx3/UAI(Release 6.0.2CF1|June 9, 2003) at 09/03/2003 17:57:48, Serialize complete at 09/03/2003 17:57:48 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 0003F2B988256D97_=" X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N This is a multipart message in MIME format. --=_alternative 0003F2B988256D97_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Hi Reinhard, "Reinhard Poetz" wrote on 09/03/2003 01:01:07 AM: > If flowscripts are reloaded depends on two parameters: First on the > configuration of the interpreter if it allows reloads at all and how > often reloads are checked. I checked cocoon.xconf and reload-scripts is set to true, check-time to 4000. >And second on the script itself. Currently > we use the (deprecated) getLastModified methods to determin if a script > has changed. This should work well for scripts resolved using the file > protocol but not the cocoon:/ protocolls. > > So for now use the file protocol to get your scripts reloaded until we > (I) find some time to change the implementation. Not sure what the file protocol would do for me. I am using the cocoon: pseudo-protocol because I wish to use a pipeline to assemble js from xml using xslt. > ad your more general question: > We discuessed this and came to the conclusion that we don't want to > forbid dynamically loaded scripts because this opens many interesting > possibilities but we haven't been sure at all if this is "bad magic" or > not. But maybe you come up with some interesting use cases. > > And please be aware that dynamically loaded flowscripts have (negative) > impact on the performance. I wouldn't use scripts that change for every > request (script loading and compiling is synchronized!) > I imagine scripts would change every few months, but sometimes as often as several times a day (for a few days). Am hoping to have SoC to the extent that the people writing the controller scripts are customers scattered around the country :-) > I'm preparing a prototype for interecepted flowscripts - maybe this can > serve your needs. If everything works well it should be found at > scratchpad at the beginning of the next week. > I will check it out. Thanks. -- Michael --=_alternative 0003F2B988256D97_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Hi Reinhard,

"Reinhard Poetz" <reinhard@apache.org> wrote on 09/03/2003 01:01:07 AM:
> If flowscripts are reloaded depends on two parameters: First on the > configuration of the interpreter if it allows reloads at all and how > often reloads are checked.

I checked cocoon.xconf and reload-scripts is set to true, check-time to 4000.

>And second on the script itself. Currently > we use the (deprecated) getLastModified methods to determin if a script > has changed. This should work well for scripts resolved using the file > protocol but not the cocoon:/ protocolls. > > So for now use the file protocol to get your scripts reloaded until we > (I) find some time to change the implementation.
Not sure what the file protocol would do for me. I am using the cocoon: pseudo-protocol because
I wish to use a pipeline to assemble js from xml using xslt.
> ad your more general question: > We discuessed this and came to the conclusion that we don't want to > forbid dynamically loaded scripts because this opens many interesting > possibilities but we haven't been sure at all if this is "bad magic" or > not. But maybe you come up with some interesting use cases. > > And please be aware that dynamically loaded flowscripts have (negative) > impact on the performance. I wouldn't use scripts that change for every > request (script loading and compiling is synchronized!) >

I imagine scripts would change every few months, but sometimes as often as several times a day (for a few days). Am hoping to have SoC to the extent that the people writing the controller scripts are customers scattered around the country :-)

> I'm preparing a prototype for interecepted flowscripts - maybe this can > serve your needs. If everything works well it should be found at > scratchpad at the beginning of the next week. >

I will check it out. Thanks.

-- Michael --=_alternative 0003F2B988256D97_=--