Would it make sense to have the pool size scale up automatically with the stateless bean count at an adjustable ratio and a hard floor of 3 or so threads? On Jun 12, 2015 2:45 PM, "Mark Struberg" <[email protected]> wrote:
> +1 Think that makes it also easier to debug and maintain. The current > approach simply doesn’t scale well in big deployments. > > LieGrue, > strub > > > > Am 12.06.2015 um 09:25 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected] > >: > > > > Hi guys, > > > > already got this issue and Mark pinged me about it yesterday. ATM we > have 1 > > eviction thread by stateless instance manager (pool). So if you have 100 > > stateless beans you then have 100 threads doing nothing. > > > > Do we want to reduce it to N fixed threads (default to 3 maybe?) per > > stateless container (but multiple tasks to keep access timeout and close > > timeout respected)? > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github < > https://github.com/rmannibucau> | > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber > > <http://www.tomitribe.com> > >
