Hi folks,
from the Quartz point of view
+) jobs can be stored in a database but the database schema is
different (migration issue)
+) org.quartz.JobDataMap stores job specific fields, e.g. "task",
"email", "property"
The real question is - how much Torque code is bleeding into Turbine
Scheduler service usage (JobEntry derives from BaseJobEntry which
exposes a few public methods)
Cheers
Sigfried Goeschl
On 1/25/11 6:18 PM, Thomas Vandahl wrote:
On 24.01.11 23:06, Scott Eade wrote:
The old scheduler was deprecated - see the bold text on
http://turbine.apache.org/turbine/turbine-2.3.3/services/scheduler-service.html
The replacement is the Fulcrum Quartz based scheduler -
http://turbine.apache.org/fulcrum/fulcrum-quartz/
Yes, but the Quartz scheduler only knows about Jobs, it does not know
about ScheduledJob modules. So a link between these two has to be
created, if we want to support this in the future. In Addition, the
TurbineSchedulerService allowed to add/update/remove jobs during runtime
which I don't see in the fulcrum-quartz interface.
The question is here: How much compatibility is required (or even possible)?
Bye, Thomas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
