Mailing-List: contact dev-help@hc.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "HttpComponents Project" <dev@hc.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of bill.speirs@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.160.179 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1314378043.4578.57.camel@ubuntu>
References: 
 <CAB_f4-Um_rgp+4EkZMBL2_pp7TmT-_w8ensiPUCKHQ7MuOiurQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<1314196752.1969.92.camel@ubuntu>
	<CAB_f4-XgbXOM8naXbh5pEEb1eSCfBsNCt9YMsSP59BSu3TchDQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAB_f4-U_2CPAgGDFnKAa24_F+PjORqhnabj3jeJUtdvYrtHr+Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<1314365389.4578.39.camel@ubuntu>
	<CAB_f4-W3z1DWCPuFR-C2z7Ei3THTaMhNBFW8B1Ahz2MUQeiCYw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAB_f4-UF37PonUMN2t=X-R1y_5P=5hyGfwxh3cxNCN7C9yVWiw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1314378043.4578.57.camel@ubuntu>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 13:20:47 -0400
Message-ID: 
 <CAB_f4-VJyYnOqGS4gA1d-R89QFcvCE2khqiapP4bc4Fxhgc0Dw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: HttpParams appear to be static/global
From: Bill Speirs <bill.speirs@gmail.com>
To: HttpComponents Project <dev@hc.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=90e6ba6e8a88292a1a04ab6bc42d

--90e6ba6e8a88292a1a04ab6bc42d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Agreed... doing all IO through one thread is prob dumb.

Like Synapse, I have a few threads listening, then I put the request through
an "assembly line" to modify the request, then I proxy the request to the
back-end server using another pool of threads, finally modifying the
response before sending it back to the requestor.

Hopefully we will open-source this at some point as it is fairly generic.

Bill-

On Aug 26, 2011 1:01 PM, "Oleg Kalnichevski" <olegk@apache.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-08-26 at 11:55 -0400, Bill Speirs wrote:
>> I'm not trying to be pedantic, just trying to understand this...
>>
>> From the Synapse source code for HttpCoreNIOListener:
>> 250 Thread t = new Thread(new Runnable() {
>> 251 public void run() {
>> 252 try {
>> 253 ioReactor.execute(ioEventDispatch);
>>
>> From the source code for HttpCoreNIOSender:
>> 195 Thread t = new Thread(new Runnable() {
>> 196 public void run() {
>> 197 try {
>> 198 ioReactor.execute(ioEventDispatch);
>>
>> It appears to me that two threads are created for two different
>> IOReactor objects: one for listening to incoming requests, and another
>> for sending requests. While this is 100% acceptable (and close to what
>> I'm currently doing), is it possible to have both running in one
>> thread? How would the IOEventDispatch which would be handling
>> everything know that connected() one time would mean that someone has
>> connected to the server, and another time it meant a connection was
>> made to the back-end service. Maybe through an attribute (and
>> associated getAttribute call) in the IOSession?
>>
>> Thanks...
>>
>> Bill-
>>
>
> You could do that, albeit with a bit of custom coding. You could extend
> BaseIOReactor and add methods to open outgoing connections and listen
> for incoming ones. The question is whether or not that would make a lot
> of sense. Multi-core systems are commonplace nowadays. If all i/o events
> were handled by one thread only one core could be utilized for i/o
> operations, thus making the system less scalable.
>
> Oleg
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org
>

--90e6ba6e8a88292a1a04ab6bc42d--