[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Transformative Programming: Flow-based, functional,and mor
I'm sure it could be made to work, but I'm not sure it should be made to work. ============= My very reason for implement xmlsh pipelines *in process* was that it is highly inefficient in practice to have lots of little tasks in a pipeline if you have a heavyweight protocol connecting them (say, starting a sub-process). In my case 100x - 10,000x inefficient. I simply cannot imagine writing an pipeline where every step involved a REST call ... It *could* be done, and maybe in cases parts of a pipeline are well suited to an external REST call ... (say fetching an external resource) but basing the fundamental architecture of a pipeline infrastructure on REST to me makes no sense. It would lead to the opposite, optimizing the pipeline so it had as few (but huge) pieces as possible to get over the infrastructure cost of step invocation. Now to flip sides, some standardized workflow engines are based on either SOAP (BPEL) or REST (AWS Workflow) ... but IMHO for similar reasons, each step tends to be huge and the workflow coordinates as few as possible big steps because the infrastructure to cross domains is heavy. This is a mega-scale pipeline, not a micro-scale. Scale matters. -David ---------------------------------------- David A. Lee dlee@calldei.com http://www.xmlsh.org
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|