Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 11262 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2005 15:09:58 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 17 Aug 2005 15:09:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 27395 invoked by uid 500); 17 Aug 2005 15:09:54 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 27338 invoked by uid 500); 17 Aug 2005 15:09:53 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 27325 invoked by uid 99); 17 Aug 2005 15:09:53 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 17 Aug 2005 08:09:53 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=10.0 tests=NO_REAL_NAME X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [17.250.248.46] (HELO smtpout.mac.com) (17.250.248.46) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 17 Aug 2005 08:10:10 -0700 Received: from mac.com (smtpin02-en2 [10.13.10.147]) by smtpout.mac.com (Xserve/8.12.11/smtpout10/MantshX 4.0) with ESMTP id j7HF9nRf008518 for ; Wed, 17 Aug 2005 08:09:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.2] (82-45-246-79.cable.ubr06.dals.blueyonder.co.uk [82.45.246.79]) (authenticated bits=0) by mac.com (Xserve/smtpin02/MantshX 4.0) with ESMTP id j7HF9k8E010745 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 17 Aug 2005 08:09:48 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v733) In-Reply-To: <2E6D479F-E088-4B94-A9EA-0B05211080E7@iq80.com> References: <20050816153016.74485.qmail@web25701.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <2E6D479F-E088-4B94-A9EA-0B05211080E7@iq80.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <4EAEF022-AD48-488B-8F7E-254EF897EB1F@mac.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: jastrachan@mac.com Subject: Re: Thread Pool vs WorkManager Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 16:09:45 +0100 To: dev@geronimo.apache.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.733) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On 16 Aug 2005, at 19:02, Dain Sundstrom wrote: > They have different purposes. The WorkManager is a lot more > powerful, but most server environments either don't have one or > don't have a publicly available implementation. I would prefer > that if service does not need a work manager, it does not use one. > This will allow a service to run in more environments. BTW if you're in a regular Spring JVM and want to reuse Geronimo's WorkManager you can just add this to your Spring.xml... http://jencks.org/Work+Manager James ------- http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/