----- Original Message ----- From: "Noel J. Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "James Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 9:31 PM Subject: RE: Scheduler Interface
> > What would be an appropriate scheduler interface ? > > The one you outline hear has the same problem. You are putting a lookup > into the INTERFACE instead of burying it in the IMPLEMENTATION. So propose an alternate interface. Propose and implementation and measure the benefit. Why is that problematic with this approach ? I don't want us to change things at this point unless there is demonstrable gain. > > > There has been some degree to reluctance to change abstraction. > > No. Peter, myself, and on occassion YOU, are willing to use the Watchdog > interface with the handlers. Danny seems willing. From what I understand, > others are willing. The work has already been done. Your code can be put > under it to provide an alternative. Peter is willing to make the changes, > if you won't (I'm really pressed for time right now). It is not as much about work. I am looking for this: > a) Measurable system gain > b) Not swap strategies in this release esp. if there is a improved Scheduler > implementation. We can take this up in next release. > c) I want a backoff strategy if there are issues. Harmeet -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
