管道组件与OperationSequence组件 [英] Pipeline Component versus OperationSequence Component

问题描述

要扩展服务器处理，可以编写新的管道组件并将其插入管道（管道级别），也可以编写operationSequence组件并将其插入MCCF级别。

To extend the server processing, one can either write a new pipeline component and insert it in a pipeline (pipeline level), or can write a operationSequence component and insert it at MCCF level.

我的问题是：

是否还有理由，编写新的管道组件，还是总是可以编写新的operationSequence组件来扩展服务器处理？换句话说，管道机制是"lecagy"。由于引入了MCCF，或者不是
？

Is there still a reason, to write new pipeline components, or is it always possible to write new operationSequence components to extend the server processing? In other words, is the pipeline mechanism "lecagy" due to the introduction of MCCF, or not ?

推荐答案

是的，这是遗产。但实际上，除非您可以使用operationSequence组件替换整个管道，否则只需插入管道组件即可。问题的核心是你没有盒子管道组件的out
的源代码，因此确保你拥有完全由自定义OperationSequence组件覆盖的等效功能是一项艰巨的任务。如果微软会发布piripeline组件的源代码，我认为这将是
的速度，它们被OperationSequence组件取代。

Yes, it is legacy. But in practice, at present, unless you can replace the entire pipeline with operationSequence components, it is quicker to just slot in a pipeline component. The core of the problem is that you do not have the source code for the out of the box pipeline components so it is a difficult task to make sure you have the equivalent functionality completely covered by custom OperationSequence components. If Microsoft would release the source code of the piripeline components, I think this would speed along them being replaced by OperationSequence components.

这篇关于管道组件与OperationSequence组件的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！