[erlang-questions] Workflow process model

Jesper Louis Andersen jesper.louis.andersen@REDACTED
Tue Oct 29 21:52:39 CET 2013

On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Charles Irvine <chuck.irvine@REDACTED>wrote:

> A little nudge or two from folks more skilled than me at this would be
> much appreciated.

Ok, here is my take on it:

Each workflow instance is a process. This process replays an (immutable)
event log from stable storage. Each event in the log is stamped with a time
stamp and the process replays the events as if they happened at that point
in time. New events are injected to the process with a time stamp. So a
process is always "lagging behind" by something, be it weeks or

When processing new events, these are written to stable storage. Thus
ensuring you can reawaken the process later and retrace its steps should it
be possible. Note that BPM system upgrades needs to be in the event log
too, so you can switch code versions. Write the SHA256 checksum of event
log and the internal process state to mnesia so you can avoid retracing
steps if the workflow becomes too long.

Processes have lifetime. When they are active, they are registered in a
registry, like gproc. When you know they are going to be inactive for a
long period, you can terminate the process, but keep a notion of the
workflow instance on stable storage, so you can restart it if necessary.

A message for an inactive workflow awakens it.

Use timers to terminate inactive workflows. Or don't. You can probably have
a million workflows in a couple of gigabytes of memory.

The advantage of this model compared to a database-centric one is that the
process can act "on its own". That is, rather than operating on the data,
the *process* is the data and it can communicate and spew out events itself.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20131029/66d71227/attachment.htm>

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list