Kris Verlaenen wrote:
>
> Note that the model of the history information is different from the
> runtime model, and contains all the nodes that were triggered (and
> possibly completed). So new data gets added to this process instance log
> every time something new happens, there's no different
Quoting Marc Dzaebel :
>
> Hi Kris,
>
> thanks for your thorough and quite helpful explanation!
>
> Kris Verlaenen wrote:
> >
> > ... concrete plans in adding separate persistence of process
> instance
> > variables in the database. I expect this to be added to trunk in a
> few
> > weeks time.
Hi Kris,
thanks for your thorough and quite helpful explanation!
Kris Verlaenen wrote:
>
> ... concrete plans in adding separate persistence of process instance
> variables in the database. I expect this to be added to trunk in a few
> weeks time.
>
So it could be in in Drools 5.0? I think th
el"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2009 12:30 AM
Subject: [rules-users] JPA persistence for Drools Flow
Hi,
w're evaluating Drools Flow 5 as a process engine for bigger projects at
Volkswagen in a world wide szenario.
There is one crucial question about process persistence. Proces
I'm working on that.. probably i have a first draft about it in two
weeks from now..
For what i know, it will be included in 5.1. But i think that i could
make it work soon.
Ask to Mark and Kris about it.
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 7:30 PM, Marc Dzaebel wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> w're evaluating Drools Flow
Hi,
w're evaluating Drools Flow 5 as a process engine for bigger projects at
Volkswagen in a world wide szenario.
There is one crucial question about process persistence. Process instances
are currently saved binary (@LOB) via ObjectOutputStream and
ByteArrayOutputStream through JPA. May be this
