portals-jetspeed-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Atul Dambalkar <adamb...@cisco.com>
Subject Re: Putting .psml/markup info into database
Date Tue, 10 Jul 2001 17:55:58 GMT

At 10:50 AM 7/10/01 +0200, you wrote:
>Atul Dambalkar wrote:
>
>>At 06:36 PM 7/7/01 +0200, you wrote:
>>
>>>Atul Dambalkar wrote:
>>> >
>>> > At 02:22 PM 7/6/01 -0700, you wrote:
>>> > >Ive started working on this today.
>>> > >Hopefully I can refactor this pretty quickly, by the weekend.
>>> >
>>> > That would be fabulous..and then we can start here on the implementation
>>> > for the DatabasePsmlManagerService. Hopefully, I will have to just follow
>>> > the "config" object (which you are referring below under PsmlManager) to
>>> > handle the database interactions.
>>> >
>>>
>>>Yes, the intitial idea is also to rewrite the CastorPsmlManager 
>>>implementation
>>>to use the Castor mapping files rather than a generated API (just like 
>>>the registry
>>>does). The same Castor mapping file can be used to describe both the xml 
>>>persistence
>>>schema and the DBMS or LDAP persistence schema and if the DBMS, LDAP and 
>>>XML impl are
>>>all based on Castor, it's very easy to provide upgrade paths from XML -> 
>>>DBMS/LDAP.
>>
>>Please, educate me here. What are Castor mapping files? Where are they 
>>located and how they are used?
>
>
>Check these:
>
>http://castor.exolab.org/xml-mapping.html
>
>http://castor.exolab.org/jdo.html

Sure...Thanks for the pointers.

They have really a good example code.

Are those Castor Mapping files ready yet? When I looked at the 
CastorPsmlManager it does use the Castor Unmarshelling..but doesn't use any 
mapping file... If those mapping files are ready, can you point me to 
that..we can directly start using that.



>>Here is what I feel: (Feel free to correct me or fill in any missing bit 
>>of information as you guys definitely know the exact flow and the side 
>>effects..)
>>0. Turbine invokes SessionValidator object in Jetspeed.
>>1. Profiler(Service) gets invoked from the 
>>org.apache.jetspeed.modules.actions.JetspeedSessionValidator
>>2. Profiler creates the ordered list of ProfileLocator objets (as you said)
>>3. Turbine invokes the profile from the RunData object, and renders the 
>>page...
>
>
>Not exactly, Turbine invokes the screenTemplate selected by the request. If no
>screen is selected, the default template is used. This template uses the
>JetspeedTool to load and render a pane resource defined in a PSMLDOcument 
>which
>is referenced by the Profile object.

Okay, great. That definitely helps me understand the flow.


>>4. In this case the implementation of the method "PSMLDocument 
>>getDocument()" in class org.apache.jetspeed.om.profile.BaseProfile needs 
>>to be changed or overridden to the one which uses, 
>>PsmlManager.fallback(Locators)..
>>5. Modify couple of methods in CastorPsmlManagerService viz. 
>>getDocument(String url) to handle Locator objects.
>>6. Implement DatabasePsmlManagerService or LDAPPsmlManagerService, 
>>transperant to ProfilerService
>
>
>Yes, that's the way it should work.
>
>
>>I just did a CVS update, looked at the updated code, cool stuff, looks 
>>perfect to me and think we are on right track, except the 
>>JetspeedProfilerService, which I think, needs modification.
>>
>>>should be used for finding documents, from the most preferred to the 
>>>least preferred
>>
>>If we implement the ProfilerSerivce this way, then there can be only one 
>>ProfilerService. Of-course JetspeedProfilerService needs to be modified 
>>to handle this functionality (basically, File-System/Resource-URL 
>>specific code from JetspeedProfilerService will just go into 
>>CastorPsmlManagerService) and then we can live with only one 
>>ProfilerService...(no separate DatabaseProfilerService or 
>>LDAPProfilerService)...., we don't have to code "Fallback algorithm" in 
>>all different Profiler Services, only Persistence will change...File 
>>system/Database/LDAP. And then we just use any PsmlManagerService as we 
>>want which can be CastorPsmlManagerService or DatabasePsmlManagerService 
>>or LDAPPsmlManagerService.
>>What do you guys think on this?
>
>
>I globally agree except than I *do* think that some users may need alternate
>
>Profiler implementation if they want to implement advanced adaptative 
>profiling

Okay, but then in that case, they definitely need to implement there own 
ProfilerService..and also the PsmlManager has to be implmented for any 
additional things.

-Atul


>systems.
>
>--
>Raphael Luta - raphael.luta@networks.groupvu.com
>Vivendi Universal Networks - Paris
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: jetspeed-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: jetspeed-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: jetspeed-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: jetspeed-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message