Rickard �berg wrote: >Dominic Cioccarelli wrote: > >> To counter the performance impact imposed due to lack of >> threads EJB server vendors must resort to complicated techniques such as >> instance pooling which isn't implemented in the same way in every EJB >> server. > > >Not sure what you're saying here. Are you implying that this >restrictions was added because of "lack of threads"? An EJB server is >(potentially, and usually) multi-threaded, so that doesn't make sense. >
Just to clarify things, what I was attempting to say is that EJB server vendors must resort to instance pooling to offset the performance degradation imposed by the fact that multiple threads can't access the same stateless session EJB simultaneously (i.e. EJB accesses are searalized). This wouldn't be necessary, say, for an RMI or CORBA server where a single object can serve multiple clients simultaneously. Dom. ==========================================================================To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
