Execution state persistence for workflow application

Alan Kennedy alanmk at hotmail.com
Tue Nov 25 12:59:55 CET 2003

[Serge Orlov]
>> The problem is that one day you will
>> have to upgrade your program and your last dumpexec won't be
>> compatible with your next loadexec(). You will have to separate
>> code from data to do it. So it means execution persistence is not
>> enough for real life use. Why not just use data persistence alone?

[Paolo Losi]
> In fact data persistence is not sufficient to stop and resume scripts
> in case, for example, system reboot.
> I do want my workflow scripts to resume exactly (and with the same
> globals/locals setup) where they left...
> The real alternative would be to define a new script language
> with standard constructs (for, while,...) but again... i don't want
> to reinvent the wheel.
> I do not seen execution persistence as an alternative to data
> persistence: I would need both.

You might want to investigate Stackless python, an excellent research
work which can save and resume execution state, to some degree. Try
the following google query



alan kennedy
check http headers here: http://xhaus.com/headers
email alan:              http://xhaus.com/mailto/alan

More information about the Python-list mailing list