dmitry, 
dive,
mf

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On 
> Behalf Of Dmitri Colebatch
> Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 10:13 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] JBoss monitoring: Thread-Pool
> 
> 
> I might be interested, although it sounds like something 
> that's fairly quick and easy - so might be simpler for an 
> existing developer to do it.
> 
> To clarify my understanding though - you're talking about a 
> JMX service that pools threads.  so a fairly simple pool with 
> the obvious configuration options yes?
> 
> If the relevant ppl who need threads could let know where 
> they currently get threads, I'd be happy to get stuck into 
> this tonight (GMT+10) and post a patch.
> 
> cheers
> dim
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dain Sundstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 12:06 PM
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] JBoss monitoring: Thread-Pool
> 
> 
> > So we all agree this is a good idea.
> >
> > Who's going to pick up the ball and run with it?
> >
> > -dain
> >
> > Hiram Chirino wrote:
> > > yes.. please..  jboss-mq would benefit also.
> > >
> > >
> > >>-----Original Message-----
> > >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On 
> Behalf Of 
> > >>Dain Sundstrom
> > >>Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 10:56 AM
> > >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >>Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] JBoss monitoring: Thread-Pool
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>I agree, but all of our stuff can use it.  This would 
> make it much 
> > >>easier to debug thread problems (like the interrupted bug).
> > >>
> > >>-dain
> > >>
> > >>Scott M Stark wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>Its a good idea to have such a service available, but using it 
> > >>>cannot be a requirement for integration at this point as 
> in general 
> > >>>we cannot get a third party to use our thread pool. The pool 
> > >>>component should really just fall out of the JCA work.
> > >>>
> > >>>xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >>>Scott Stark
> > >>>Chief Technology Officer
> > >>>JBoss Group, LLC
> > >>>xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >>>----- Original Message -----
> > >>>From: "Dain Sundstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >>>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >>>Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 7:21 AM
> > >>>Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] JBoss monitoring: Thread-Pool
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>I think it would be cool to have a centralized thread 
> pool mbean 
> > >>>>that anyone that needs a worker thread goes to.  The pool would 
> > >>>>need to be partitioned, but that is fairly simple.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>What do you think?
> > >>>>
> > >>>>-dain
> > >>>>
> > >>>>Sacha Labourey wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>Cool. But do you mean that each part/module of JBoss consuming
> threads
> > >>>>>should hood in JCA? Isn't that overkill?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>For example, the invokers, great consumers of threads, will
> > >>>>
> > >>they need to
> > >>
> > >>>>>hook in JCA? How do you see that?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>-----Message d'origine-----
> > >>>>>>De : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> >>>>>>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]De
>  la part 
> > >>>>>>de David Jencks Envoy� : jeudi, 29 ao�t 2002 15:49
> > >>>>>>� : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >>>>>>Objet : Re: [JBoss-dev] JBoss monitoring: Thread-Pool
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>One of the parts of jca 1.5 is a thread pool with transaction 
> > >>>>>>import capabilities. (Work contracts)  I hope to get this 
> > >>>>>>committed
> > >>>>>
> > >>in the next
> > >>
> > >>>>>>couple of days, it's written and somewhat tested.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>david jencks
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>On 2002.08.29 09:21:01 -0400 Sacha Labourey wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>Hello,
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>As part of JBoss monitoring, the thread usage is a very 
> > >>>>>>>interesting indication. Furthermore, for performance 
> reasons, 
> > >>>>>>>having a
> > >>>>>>
> > >>thread pool
> > >>
> > >>>>>>>would
> > >>>>>>>be a good thing (TM).
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>What do you think about integrating a thread pool in JBoss?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>Parts such as
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>JavaGroups would also need to be integrated in this
> > >>>>>>
> > >>framework (JG is a
> > >>
> > >>>>>>>big
> > >>>>>>>thread consumer)
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>David, Mr. Pool ;), what do you think about it?
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>Cheers,
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>Sacha
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
> > Welcome to geek heaven.
> > http://thinkgeek.com/sf 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Jboss-development mailing list 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
> Welcome to geek heaven.
> http://thinkgeek.com/sf
> _______________________________________________
> Jboss-development mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
> 



-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development

Reply via email to