Mailing-List: contact users-help@camel.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: users@camel.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of christian.mueller@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.216.45 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1345688900844-5717906.post@n5.nabble.com>
References: <1345658393855-5717888.post@n5.nabble.com>
	<CAGB5yNmYFYVYDnyB6eL6tmDiYXMwFYa1LC_KGQtjk+f6z5jGdQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<1345666780343-5717898.post@n5.nabble.com>
	<CALvzYd90x1d2m4hYwwRmEj_8MsACnp6q_bsNxqRjqF1Bvt3b2Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<1345688900844-5717906.post@n5.nabble.com>
Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2012 23:13:00 +0200
Message-ID: 
 <CALvzYd-3jaNh4G1fusPwOm+c4QXRRt2-5gDP+fYRgKT0wO5Y+g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: concurrent users with camel routes
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Christian_M=FCller?= <christian.mueller@gmail.com>
To: users@camel.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf3074d58cb0115704c81d8e25

--20cf3074d58cb0115704c81d8e25
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Hi Javakurious!

Please find my responses inline in your mail.

Best,
Christian

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 4:28 AM, javakurious <javakurious@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks Christian for the response.
>
> If I understand your response correctly, a single instance of processor
> will
> be shared between thread safe. Isn't that inefficient?
>
No. It is efficient.

>
> In my specific example, I have a processor RequestProcessor which extracts
> the body of the exchange, parses the body into an XML document and examines
> element values using XPATH , and does some additional processing.
>
> RequestProcessor(){
>
>      private DocumentBuilder db;
>
>     public RequestProcessor(){
>            db=DobcumentBuilderFactory.newInstance(); // initialize
> DocumentBuilder
>     }
>
>     public void process(Exchange exchange){
>            String body = exchange.getIn().getBody(String.class)
>            Document doc = db.parse(body);
>            //process the doc.
>     }
>
> }
> In the above example, if each HTTP thread is sharing the same
> RequestProcessor instance, won't it have performance impact if I have to
> synchronize "db.parse(body)" section or a more complex time consuming
> section ?
>
Yes it will be your bottleneck. I assume the DocumentBuilder is not thread
safe? If it's thread safe, you don't have to synchronize the access...
If it's not, why you don't create a new DocumentBuilder for each method
invocation? To expensive? Than pool a few DocumentBuilder instances (we do
similar things with the JAXB Marshaler/Unmarshaler, if I remember right).

>
> Is there a way to create a pool of these processors so that each HTTP
> thread
> can use a dedicated process for the duration of a request ?
>
Why pooling the processors and not the DocumentBuilder's? Wouldn't that be
more efficient?

>
> Thanks
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/concurrent-users-with-camel-routes-tp5717888p5717906.html
> Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>


--

--20cf3074d58cb0115704c81d8e25--