Hi! I don't think mina-list is the right list for this.
Some thoughts, anyway: "shared memory" between threads should be synchronized somehow (doesn't mean it has to be in a synchronized block), so it's a big performance killer to synchronize all variables. If you need synchronized variables read the documentation for the "volatile" flag and the API for the atomic- and concurrency-packages will be usefull as well. If you implement your own "thread model" in a single thread, your application won't scale very well to multi processor systems. A simple form of this "thread model" is the Executor created by "Executors.newSingleThreadExecutor()". But it's poison for scalability!!! My opinion: using some volatile flags, Locks and concurrency collections at the right positions will surely do the trick and lead to a better scalability. Even a little oversynchronisation will be better than a "single thread thread model" ;-) regards Steve > Simon Funnell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Dear List, > > This is not exactly Mina specific, its more general, but its close to > the problem Mina surrounds. I have been working on an approach to > concurrency and I have come to the point where the Java Thread model is > causing me problems. I would like to create my own threading model that > does away with shared memory and thread memory, so there is just shared > memory. My original idea was to use a single thread and implement my > own > threads within that thread. The difficulty with this is that there is > still copying from shared memory to thread working memory (as I > understand it). I would like to cut out this shared memory to thread > memory and back to shared memory copying. Is this possible? > > Thanks for any replies. > > Regards, > > Simon
