geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dain Sundstrom <d...@iq80.com>
Subject Re: Thread Pool vs WorkManager
Date Tue, 16 Aug 2005 17:49:21 GMT
I don't think it is a big deal to use a concurrent Executor, since it  
is a subset of WorkManager.  Executor has one method:

     public void execute(java.lang.Runnable command)

which maps easily to:

     public void scheduleWork(Work work)

Now, we just need WorkManagerExector and RunnableWork classes :)

-dain

On Aug 16, 2005, at 8:30 AM, Thomas P. Fuller wrote:

> Aaron,
>
> Ok I'm not an expert on the internals of J2EE
> architecture, but I'm going to give my .02$ here
> regardless and you can beat me up if/when you
> disagree:
>
> I think the standardization should be on the work
> manager api since it's purpose is to provide "...a
> concurrent programming API for use within managed
> environments on the Java TM platform, such as Servlets
> and EJBs" (I'm quoting directly from the paper
> Commonj-TimerAndWorkManager-Specification-v1.1).
>
> Using the work manager api also seems to make for a
> more sound architecture since the responsibility of
> task execution would be left to the api and would
> remove the requirement to maintain this logic in more
> than one place.
>
> Finally, it would seem appropriate that a future
> enhancement to the OpenEJB impl could involve the
> removal of the thread pools, replacing it with
> delegation of task execution directly to the work
> manager api; this is speculation and off topic,
> however, and so I won't continue.
>
> Thomas

Mime
View raw message