tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3776799.post3370424026237066107..comments2019-08-30T06:08:13.223-07:00Comments on Sean McGrath: More on the KLISS workflow modelSean McGrathhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17729925642255386855noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3776799.post-23922079967610919332010-08-16T12:50:33.225-07:002010-08-16T12:50:33.225-07:00Tom,
From a setup perspective, I believe the TPOZ ...Tom,<br />From a setup perspective, I believe the TPOZ model is better than the straight RDBMS model for workflow (of course I'm biased!) because the folder structure that captures the workflow is dynamically created. I.e. there is no locked down set of workflow states and state transitions. There are other systems that are similarly fluid w.r.t. workflow. Lotus Notes for example, comes to mind although it takes a very different approach.<br /><br />In terms of on-going care and feeding by DBAs or their equivalents, I would say TpoZ approach and the RDBMS end up about the same.<br /><br />regards,<br />SeanSean McGrathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17729925642255386855noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3776799.post-62964907321898382412010-08-16T12:23:35.932-07:002010-08-16T12:23:35.932-07:00Sean, This is a fascinating approach. How would T...Sean, This is a fascinating approach. How would TpoZ compare to RDBMS time-wise in terms of setup and maintenance? Suppose a company has nothing at time n=zero except a choice between TpoZ and RDBMS to handle workflows. Would they require roughly the same amount of training/effort to set up? Also, would the company need to hire the equivalent to DBAs to manage the system long term? (TpoZAs?)tom.ryannoreply@blogger.com