whirr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ashish <paliwalash...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Provisioning as a Dedicated Service
Date Fri, 01 Mar 2013 01:14:34 GMT
Andrei,

Can you add me as contributor, if it works for you :)


On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 12:32 AM, Andrei Savu <savu.andrei@gmail.com> wrote:

> 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
> >
> >
>



-- 
thanks
ashish

Blog: http://www.ashishpaliwal.com/blog
My Photo Galleries: http://www.pbase.com/ashishpaliwal

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