geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "gianny DAMOUR" <gianny_dam...@hotmail.com>
Subject RE: [Deployment] IM #2 Summary for Directory Issue
Date Sun, 05 Oct 2003 00:56:29 GMT
From: "Jeremy Boynes" <jeremy@coredevelopers.net>
Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2003 02:14:42 -0700
>This is why I believe the two need to be separate. The service
>controller manages the global state of the server and would be managing
>a controlled shutdown; so it can save the target configuration rather
>than having to have separate target and actual state values in each
>MBean. It also means that all the state can be dumped in one go, rather
>than having to persist each MBean individually (which could involve
>significantly more data).
Ok. Thanks for that, it shades some light on why a separate approach is 
required.

> > When a ManagedObject is restored, one uses this target state
> > to trigger the
> > relevant operation. One drawback I see in defining two
> > services is that we
> > will end up with two locations to be merged when the server
> > is re-started.
> > Moreover, it allows to share the persistence policy between these two
> > services.
>
>I don't get the two locations bit - I would say there are N+1 persistent
>datasets (persistent attributes from N MBeans + 1 target global state
>definition (which may be the persistent state of the ServiceController
>but that is impl detail)).
Ok. Thanks one more time for this indication.

Gianny

_________________________________________________________________
Trouvez l'âme soeur sur MSN Rencontres http://g.msn.fr/FR1000/9551


Mime
View raw message