|
From: Trevor C. <pr...@se...> - 2003-11-03 17:44:28
|
>> RECOMMENDATION >> -------------- >> 1. The scheduler's persistence mechanism should be part of the scheduler >> configuration rather than as seperate methods (similiar to Quartz). This >> would mean that Chronos would need to be changed to set this configuration. > > The problem here is that, for example, CronScheduler supports both > persistent and non-persistent tasks at the same time. > > But it's easy to change CronScheduler (by adding a configuration > option) to treat all tasks as persistent. > > We can't support both methods at the same time with Quartz, can we? No, Quartz does it at configuration time. From a really high level, it's basically "2 schedulers, 1 scheduling method" vs. "1 scheduler, 2 scheduling methods". From a user view, 2 methods means choosing persistence mechanism in the use case, while 2 schedulers means the use case uses a single generic method and doesn't care about the type of scheduler (which can be configured in Spring's context). While both are effective and work, I think the latter allows more flexibility and is closer to Spring's abstraction model. >> 4. Naming of jobs should be allowed but not required (allowing "simple" >> usage"). > > Agreed. Would Quartz wrapper autogenerate names then? Quartz doesn't, but I think Spring's "quartz-wrapper" should. Complicating "Chronos" doesn't make sense, and the overloaded method which will accept a name will still allow implicit naming. Trevor -- ModSecurity (http://www.modsecurity.org) [ Open source IDS for Web applications ] ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive? Does it help you create better code? SHARE THE LOVE, and help us help YOU! Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/ _______________________________________________ Springframework-developer mailing list Spr...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springframework-developer |