geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Dillon <ja...@planet57.com>
Subject Re: Why both concurrent and backport-util-concurrent?
Date Wed, 30 Aug 2006 00:53:02 GMT
I'm not sure... think David Jencks needs to answer that.

--jason


On Aug 29, 2006, at 5:28 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:

> Duh. I should have known that :)
>
> That seems like the best policy... is there a reason we aren't  
> using that?
>
> -dain
>
> On Aug 29, 2006, at 5:19 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
>
>> Just a guess.... but I think the alternative it sot use the run as  
>> caller, and just run the task in the current thread, instead o  
>> blocking the current thread.
>>
>> --jason
>>
>>
>> On Aug 29, 2006, at 5:13 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
>>
>>> On Aug 29, 2006, at 4:25 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
>>>
>>>>>     The changes in the configuration for the Executor in Java5  
>>>>> seem much better.
>>>>
>>>> I did run into one issue with ThreadPoolExecutor... this has no  
>>>> wait policy, and some discussion online related indicate that it  
>>>> was not added to java.util.concurrent stuff because it was not  
>>>> very safe or friendly todo... or something like that.
>>>>
>>>> I was not sure exactly how to get around that and use the  
>>>> standard policies, so I wrote a wait policy that does basically  
>>>> the same thing (i think) as the wait policy for PooledExecutor.
>>>
>>>
>>> Interesting.  I suppose the alternative is to just create more  
>>> threads on demand which can really stress a server at the worst  
>>> time, when it is running out of resources.
>>>
>>> -dain
>


Mime
View raw message