whirr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrei Savu <savu.and...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Provisioning as a Dedicated Service
Date Thu, 28 Feb 2013 19:02:02 GMT
Hi guys -

I have submitted a proposal to bring Axemblr Provisionr to the Apache
Incubator (see general@incubator.apache.org):

http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ProvisionrProposal

And this is a slide deck that explains medium term plans & challenges:

http://www.slideshare.net/savu.andrei/creating-pools-of-virtual-machines-apachecon-na-2013

If you want to join as a mentor / initial contributor you are welcome!

Thanks,

-- Andrei Savu

On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Paul Baclace <paul.baclace@gmail.com>wrote:

> On 20130209 4:37 , Andrei Savu wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 4:44 AM, Paul Baclace <paul.baclace@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>  Do you have any rough idea of state transition latency and throughput you
>>> get when using Activiti and how this compares to using Whirr/jclouds in a
>>> single process?
>>>
>>>  Is this important? During pool creation most of the time is spent in
>> loops
>> waiting for external services. We try to keep each activity as short as
>> possible to avoid long running transactions.
>>
>>  The reason I ask is that although Activiti has good support for designing
>>> processes and programmatic control of the engine, it is necessarily DB
>>> transaction limited. An obvious alternative design is to use something
>>> that
>>> is actor based which can run entirely in RAM. I admit that an actor
>>> control
>>> system would make it harder to trace what happened, compared to business
>>> process control which is very much oriented toward human-in-the-loop.
>>>
>>>  I think it's going to take while for us to hit that limitation. I see
>> good
>> performance even if we are using an embedded H2 database - it should work
>> a
>> lot better with a PostgresSQL server. It's true that Activiti is oriented
>> towards human-in-the-loop processes but it works well also for
>> unsupervised
>> ones.
>>
>>
>>  As long as the orchestration is at the appropriate granularity (not
> micro-managing), then using Activiti should be fine. Another thing it can
> do that is more challenging for a single machine actor system is preserve
> state across controller restarts.
>
> Paul
>
>

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