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

http://www.google.com/search?q=pickling+site%3Astackless.com

HTH,

-- 
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