New-age Transactional Systems - Not Your Grandpa's OLTP
John Hugg discusses high volume transaction processing applications with high and low frequency profiles, and how VoltDB can be used for that purpose.
The content has been bookmarked!
There was an error bookmarking this content! Please retry.
Posted by Mark Little on Apr 11, 2007
There has been a lot said about WS-Context over the years, most recently at the W3C workshop on Web of Services and in the majority it has drawn positive comments. In summary, WS-Context defines a basic (extensible) context structure that can be associated with an abstract activity: the lifetime of the activity is the lifetime of the context. The activity can then be used to model a session: all interactions on a session-oriented service in the scope of an activity will be uniquely and unambiguously tied to that activity through the context. Importantly, the context (and hence session) is not tied to the endpoint reference of the service: the same service can be addressed by multiple clients or services in the scope of different sessions concurrently. The session concept is therefore loosely coupled with respect to communication channels and service endpoints: the session may be used in conjunction with a service for a short period or even shared across multiple services. Late binding also means that protocols may use WS-Context to support either ephemeral or long-lived sessions associated with a fixed service endpoint definition as appropriate within an application.
Although there may appear to be overlaps with WS-Addressing, the two are more complimentary than competitive. Think of the possible relationship like URIs and cookies in the traditional Web. If used together and used right, loosely coupled, scalable stateful and stateless interactions in Web Services are possible. If used incorrectly, or ignored then closely coupled, brittle systems can result. Whether WS-Context has a big impact on the evolving Web Services architecture remains to be seen. The fact that IBM and Microsoft were not involved will certainly hinder the take-up and influence.
John Hugg discusses high volume transaction processing applications with high and low frequency profiles, and how VoltDB can be used for that purpose.
Kevlin Henney examines code samples to see what can be learned from them starting from the premise that one won’t write great code unless he knows how to read it.
Jason Ayers share the observations he made watching a team of developers collaborating in real time on the same code base, pushing XP, pair programming and continuous integration to their extremes.
Michael Snoyman presents Yesod, a web framework written in Haskell and containing a web server, templating, ORM, libraries (templating, gravatar, etc.).
Richard Kreuter and Kyle Banker on how to avoid classical RDBMS transactional systems by using compensation mechanisms, transactional messaging or transactional procedures.
Attila Szegedi talks about performance tuning Java and Scala programs at Twitter: how to approach GC problems, the importance of asynchronous I/O, when to use MySQL/Cassandra/Redis, and much more.
One category of risk that project teams need to ensure they address is business value failure – delivering a product that fails to provide value for the business investor.
InfoQ spoke to the authors of Software Systems Architecture on a couple of new topics, the System Context viewpoint and Agile, which have been added to the second edition.
No comments
Watch Thread Reply