On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 4:44 AM, Paul Baclace <[email protected]> wrote:
> I keep watching the update stream of github.com/axemblr/axemblr-** > provisionr <http://github.com/axemblr/axemblr-provisionr> and still see > plenty of activity. > We are preparing a new release with support for spot instances, an easy way to add pre-configure pool templates [1] and integration with Rundeck ( http://rundeck.org/) [1] https://github.com/axemblr/axemblr-provisionr/blob/master/core/src/main/resources/com/axemblr/provisionr/core/templates/cdh3.xml > 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. -- Andrei Savu / axemblr.com
