You are probably right about the automatic clean-up. That is actually what makes sense. However I should point to what caused me to think otherwise.
In the Trinidad developer manual, on the page http://myfaces.apache.org/trinidad/devguide/communicatingBetweenPages.html it is stated: pageFlowScope never empties itself; the only way to clear pageFlowScope is
to manually force it to clear
What do you make of this? Am I interpreting it wrongly, is it not up-to-date? I imagine the scope is emptied at specific points, but I can't make out specifically when. Or conversely when the scope is kept between requests. Can anyone clarify this? On 7/16/07, Laperle, Denis <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
You're right about the automatic clean-up upon process termination but only a new window starts a new process so it's not very useful unless a new window is associated to each process and sub-process you need. I read the documentation about the Spring Webflow JSF integration and it seems very interesting to handle managed-beans state and navigation with this framework. I will seriously consider it for any serious JSF application development requiring conversation scope. -----Message d'origine----- De: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de Laurie Harper Envoyé: 13 juillet 2007 17:38 À: users@myfaces.apache.org Objet: Re: Trinidad table paging Francisco Passos wrote: > Great to know you've got it working. > > I'm now using the process scope feature of Trinidad and it's works fine but >> it means that I will have to clear the process scope context manually >> at the >> appropriate time within the application to avoid high memory >> consumption on >> the server side. > > That is exactly why I'm choosing to avoid to use process scope as much as > I'm avoiding session. I guess I'll only use it if I need to do something > session-scoped that requires support for tabbed browsing, for instance. I haven't played much with process scope and haven't used it recently, so I could be wrong, but: That's the point of process scope, though; the clean-up is handled for you automatically. That's the difference between process scope and session scope. IIRC, the way it works is that data you place *into* process scope in request N will be available *from* process scope in request N+1, but will be gone in request N+2 unless you explicitly refresh it. L.
