avalon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Paulo Gaspar" <paulo.gas...@krankikom.de>
Subject RE: [VOTE] RE: ComponentManager interface
Date Sat, 16 Feb 2002 02:07:15 GMT
Hi Peter,


I really think that my silly token based mechanism is much 
lighter and efficient than a child CM would be.

Besides, keep in mind that my CM only keeps track of those
components that really must be released.


Have fun,
Paulo Gaspar

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Donald [mailto:peter@apache.org]
> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 11:57 PM
> To: Avalon Developers List
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] RE: ComponentManager interface
> 
> 
> On Sat, 16 Feb 2002 08:52, Berin Loritsch wrote:
> > Now, there are a number of projects who do request/release 
> semantics with
> > the Components in question.  That would require alot of rewrite
> 
> Im not proposing you update verything now - I would even say that 
> you should 
> not update to use CMs replacement until you hit Cocoon3 or something like 
> that ;)
> 
> > I *really* want to have a releaseless interface, but with the current
> > realities, I am just not seeing how it can be practically done.
> 
> Not possible from practical standpoint if you want 100% of CM users to 
> migrate without modification.
> 
> > BTW, release() is not Subversion of Control.  It is more like a 
> "locking"
> > mechanism.  In the end, the Container can do what it wants--i.e. after a
> > timeout period automatically reclaim the resource.
> 
> Yep :) I was just waiitng to see what sort of response I would 
> get. It can be 
> Subversion and in the past ihas been implemented that way.
> 
> > We can't truly have a request based pattern that behaves in the 
> assumption
> > of one thread per process.  In a SEDA based environment, one 
> request can be
> > handled by any number of threads.  In that respect, a ThreadLocal Token
> > would not be useable--although the Token passed in the Request message
> > would work....
> 
> or alternatively you could retrieve the CM from the request 
> object and just 
> use that CM (without needing Tokens etc). So you would go 
> 
> public void serviceRequest( MyRequest r )
> {
>   final ComponentManager cm = r.getComponentManager();
>   cm.lookup(...)
> }
> 
> and the object that calls the serviceRequest() method would be 
> responsible 
> for releasing any resources obtained. You could still use the normal 
> Composable mechanisms to get static resources if need be but use 
> the CM from 
> request to get per-request resources. I am not sure that Cocoon 
> components 
> actually have any need for static services though?
> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> 
> Pete
> 
> ---------------------------------------
> Be nice to your friends. If it weren't 
> for them, you'd be a complete stranger.
> ---------------------------------------
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
<mailto:avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message