You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@avalon.apache.org by Leo Sutic <le...@inspireinfrastructure.com> on 2004/04/27 11:55:49 UTC
Re: [RT] System Fault Tolerance in Dataflow Oriented system
Niclas wrote:
> However in DataFlow Oriented systems (which is what I normally work
with) I
> use a distinction between "Signal" and "Parameter", and I have
concluded that
> a completely transparent SFT layer can be introduced without the
support of
> the components in such systems.
Another interesting thing to note is that data flows in one direction
only
in the system. This is very similar to SEDA architecture, where you wire
the
components up via queues.
More about this (with language examples) can be found at:
http://graphics.stanford.edu/projects/brookgpu/
or Google for "stream processing".
/LS
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: [RT] System Fault Tolerance in Dataflow Oriented system
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Tuesday 27 April 2004 17:55, Leo Sutic wrote:
> Another interesting thing to note is that data flows in one direction
> only in the system. This is very similar to SEDA architecture,
> where you wire the components up via queues.
I know that! And SEDA becomes a "transport" plug-in.
In fact, my type of systems, should actually not even use the "method call"
principle that we are so used to. "There is no return, so why fill up a
stack", and stacktraces in these types of systems becomes 'awful', to say the
least.
Cheers
Niclas
--
+---------//-------------------+
| http://www.bali.ac |
| http://niclas.hedhman.org |
+------//----------------------+
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org