Looks good. We may want to add a synchronize keyword the two
schedule() methods, empty the start one, and make sure to check if the
timer has been created in the stop method (and set it back to null
btw). And I think the stop method should be synchronized too ...
Feel free to go ahead and commit this modified class.
On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Thomas Termin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks! So cool that I'm not absolutly wrong here. :-D
>
> I did the following:
>
> public Timer schedule(TimerListener listener, long delay) {
> if (LOG.isDebugEnabled()) {
> LOG.debug("Schedule timer " + listener + " for " + delay);
> }
> TimerImpl tt = new TimerImpl(listener);
> if (timer == null) {
> timer = new java.util.Timer();
> }
> timer.schedule(tt, delay);
> return tt;
> }
>
> public Timer schedule(TimerListener listener, Date date) {
> if (LOG.isDebugEnabled()) {
> LOG.debug("Schedule timer " + listener + " at " + date);
> }
> TimerImpl tt = new TimerImpl(listener);
> if (timer == null) {
> timer = new java.util.Timer();
> }
> timer.schedule(tt, date);
> return tt;
> }
>
> That starts the timer if the schedule method id used. The advantage for
> me was just to change the TimerManagerImpl class.
>
> But I think we can also use your way.
>
> Cheers,
> Thomas
>
> Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>> Absolutely.
>> Actually, I think it should be safe to create / start the timer in the
>> getTimerManager() method. We may need to add a boolean property to
>> know if the timer manager has been started or not. This would lead to
>> only changing the EIPEndpoint class.
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 3:12 PM, Thomas Termin
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>another question. Each EIPEndpoint has an TimerManager associated and it
>>>is also startet and a thread is created even if it is not used. The only
>>>class which I can see using the runing timer thread is the
>>>AbstractAggregator. Would it be not better to create just a
>>>TimerManagerImpl instance in each EIPComponent but start it the first
>>>time it is really used? The AbstractAggregator could check if it runs
>>>and when not could start it. We could save a lot of created threads (at
>>>least in our cases), couldn't we?
>>>It might be that I'm wrong so please correct me. What do you think?
>>>
>>>Cheers
>>>Thomas
>>>--
>>>Thomas Termin
>>>_______________________________
>>>blue elephant systems GmbH
>>>Wollgrasweg 49
>>>D-70599 Stuttgart
>>>
>>>Tel : (+49) 0711 - 45 10 17 676
>>>Fax : (+49) 0711 - 45 10 17 573
>>>WWW : http://www.blue-elephant-systems.com
>>>Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>>blue elephant systems GmbH
>>>Firmensitz : Wollgrasweg 49, D-70599 Stuttgart
>>>Registergericht : Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 24106
>>>Geschäftsführer : Holger Dietrich, Thomas Gentsch, Joachim Hoernle
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Thomas Termin
> _______________________________
> blue elephant systems GmbH
> Wollgrasweg 49
> D-70599 Stuttgart
>
> Tel : (+49) 0711 - 45 10 17 676
> Fax : (+49) 0711 - 45 10 17 573
> WWW : http://www.blue-elephant-systems.com
> Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> blue elephant systems GmbH
> Firmensitz : Wollgrasweg 49, D-70599 Stuttgart
> Registergericht : Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 24106
> Geschäftsführer : Holger Dietrich, Thomas Gentsch, Joachim Hoernle
>
>
--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
