portals-jetspeed-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "David Sean Taylor" <da...@bluesunrise.com>
Subject RE: Question on Muliple portlet instance behavior
Date Thu, 27 Jun 2002 18:51:40 GMT


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Weaver, Scott [mailto:Sweaver@rippe.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 11:46 AM
> To: 'Jetspeed Developers List'
> Subject: RE: Question on Muliple portlet instance behavior
> 
> 
> > Yes I'd drop the whole package. Unless we want to 
> introduce/perpetuate 
> > yet another service framework. I prefer we do not do that at this 
> > time, and continue with the Turbine service framework for now
> 
> I agree, it will then be more Turbine-esque that way.   Plus 
> it will be
> easier to manage/understand.  I currently have some personal 
> issues with fulcrum, so I want to start this out as a coupled service.
> 
> The change shouldn't be to invasive as it appears the only 
> classes using the ServiceFactory are AbstractPortlet and 
> CustomizeAction.  Does this sound right, or should I look deeper?

That's right

> 
> New package name suggestion: org.apache.jetspeed.services.persistence
> Is this kewl?
Kewl 

> 
> I'm going to start out simple at first, probably just passing 
> in a portlet, attribute name, and RunData to  getter and 
> setter methods and returning the attribute in question.
> 

Ok don't hesitate to ask if you have any questions

David
>  
> 
> Scott
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David Sean Taylor [mailto:david@bluesunrise.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 1:21 PM
> > To: 'Jetspeed Developers List'
> > Subject: RE: Question on Muliple portlet instance behavior
> > 
> > Yes I'd drop the whole package. Unless we want to 
> introduce/perpetuate 
> > yet another service framework. I prefer we do not do that at this 
> > time, and continue with the Turbine service framework for now
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Weaver, Scott [mailto:Sweaver@rippe.com]
> > > Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 11:18 AM
> > > To: 'Jetspeed Developers List'
> > > Subject: RE: Question on Muliple portlet instance behavior
> > >
> > >
> > > David,
> > >
> > > If we are implementing it as a TurbineService, stop me if 
> I'm wrong 
> > > here, there is no need for the ServiceFactory, correct?
> > >
> > > Scott
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: David Sean Taylor [mailto:david@bluesunrise.com]
> > > > Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 1:06 PM
> > > > To: 'Jetspeed Developers List'
> > > > Subject: RE: Question on Muliple portlet instance behavior
> > > >
> > > > > You still want to keep the PersistenceService interface as is 
> > > > > correct?
> > > >
> > > > Im not tied to it at all. The interface looks overly
> > > complicated with
> > > > the inner Page interface Please write a new interface if
> > > you think its
> > > > necessary.
> > > >
> > > > I would rewrite it as a Turbine service, like every other
> > > service in
> > > > Jetspeed (except this one)
> > > >
> > > > > I will start looking at gutting/rewriting the service.
> > > >
> > > > Great!
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Weaver, Scott [mailto:Sweaver@rippe.com]
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 10:49 AM
> > > > > To: 'Jetspeed Developers List'
> > > > > Subject: RE: Question on Muliple portlet instance behavior
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > You still want to keep the PersistenceService interface as is 
> > > > > correct?
> > > > >
> > > > > One the first suggestion I have would be to replace all
> > > the instance
> > > > > of Vector with ArrayList, to improve performance. They
> > > did this with
> > > > > Torque and supposedly it garnered them a nice increase in 
> > > > > performance.  The only issue I see with this would be 
> if you are 
> > > > > betting on those Lists to be threadsafe.
> > > > >
> > > > > I will start looking at gutting/rewriting the service.
> > > > >
> > > > > Scott
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: David Sean Taylor [mailto:david@bluesunrise.com]
> > > > > > Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 12:29 PM
> > > > > > To: 'Jetspeed Developers List'
> > > > > > Subject: RE: Question on Muliple portlet instance behavior
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I wouldn't mind if you rewrote the whole class and
> > > threw away the
> > > > > > existing. That is what I was planning on doing. I think 
> > > > > > JetspeedPersistenceService is pretty bad
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > From: Weaver, Scott [mailto:Sweaver@rippe.com]
> > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 10:29 AM
> > > > > > > To: 'Jetspeed Developers List'
> > > > > > > Subject: RE: Question on Muliple portlet instance behavior
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks for the response, David.  I am VERY interested in
> > > > > getting it
> > > > > > > work. I'm currently looking at the PersistenceService and
> > > > > its inner
> > > > > > > class, PersistenceService.Page, right now.  Let me now
if
> > > > > I'm on the
> > > > > > > right track and I will continue to work on it.  
> Hopefully, I 
> > > > > > > will be able to come up with a suitable patch.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I welcome any pointers you may have.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > Scott
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > From: David Sean Taylor [mailto:david@bluesunrise.com]
> > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 12:11 PM
> > > > > > > > To: 'Jetspeed Developers List'
> > > > > > > > Subject: RE: Question on Muliple portlet 
> instance behavior
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The JetspeedPersistenceService still needs to 
> be updated 
> > > > > > > > to support portlet instances. It doesn't 
> consider portlet 
> > > > > > > > ids
> > > > > > > > (instances) or non-default pages. Its high on my todo
> > > > > list, unless
> > > > > > > > someone
> > > > > > > else fixes
> > > > > > > > it first...
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > > From: Weaver, Scott [mailto:Sweaver@rippe.com]
> > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 7:57 AM
> > > > > > > > > To: 'Jetspeed Developers List'
> > > > > > > > > Subject: Question on Muliple portlet instance
behavior
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I have noticed some "odd" behavior when it comes
> > > to multiple
> > > > > > > > > instance of the same portlet.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Example:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Let's say I have a portlet, "MyPortlet", 
> which extends 
> > > > > > > > > VelocityPortlet.  It has a single attribute called
> > > > > "test." Now,
> > > > > > > > > I add this portlet to 2 separate panes, pane_1
and
> > > > > pane_2.  My
> > > > > > > > > PSML file reflects that MyPortlet is in fact
in
> > > both pane_1
> > > > > > > and pane_2,
> > > > > > > > > each instance of MyPortlet has a unique ID value.
> > > So far so
> > > > > > > > > good.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Now, this is the part that does not seem 
> right, to me at
> > > > > > > least.  If
> > > > > > > > > I have an action that sets the value of the attribute

> > > > > > > > > "test", regardless of which instance of MyPortlet
> > > calls the
> > > > > > > action the value
> > > > > > > > > is both stored and retrieved from the first (as
> > > it appears
> > > > > > > > > in the PSML file) instance of MyPortlet in 
> pane_1.  The 
> > > > > > > > > second
> > > > > > > instance of
> > > > > > > > > MyPortlet in pane_2 never gets or sets its 
> own attribute
> > > > > > > "test", and
> > > > > > > > > it always refers to the attribute "test" in the
first
> > > > > instance
> > > > > > > > > of MyPortlet.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Before I dig any deeper I need to ask, "Is 
> this correct
> > > > > > > behavior for
> > > > > > > > > multiple instances of the same portlet?"
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I'm using the most current CVS HEAD for 1.3a3.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > Scott
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:jetspeed-dev-
> > > > > > > > unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
> > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:jetspeed-dev-

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



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


Mime
View raw message