geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dain Sundstrom <d...@iq80.com>
Subject Re: Why both concurrent and backport-util-concurrent?
Date Wed, 30 Aug 2006 00:28:24 GMT
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