You may also consider IBM's multi-tenant JVM:
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-multitenant-java/index.html?ca=drs
It's a rehash of MVM from the SunLab's Barcelona project 10 years ago
(e.g., see
http://www.digitalcld.com/cld/emerging-technology-ibms-remarkable-multi-tenant-cloud-jvm-for-java-8).
Laurent
On 1/13/14 12:16 AM, Ben Evans wrote:
You might want to take a look at the Waratek JVM - it has an
interesting approach to this problem.
Thanks,
Ben
On 12 Jan 2014 23:15, "Mark Roos" <mr...@roos.com
<mailto:mr...@roos.com>> wrote:
From Charles
I forgot to mention: more and more users are going with
exactly one
JRuby runtime per app, and most Ruby folks deploy one app
in a given
I have been pondering the merits of apps with a shared jvm (
protection is provided via a
sandbox) vs independent jvms per app. Since they are all
communicating via messages the
thought of avoiding serialization is appealing. I am looking at
the Kilim approach to object
isolation which adds some complexity but does support the concept
of passing ownership
of objects between the sandboxes (Actors).
Any others have thoughts on how one might best do this 'Erlang'
like approach?
thx
mark
_______________________________________________
mlvm-dev mailing list
mlvm-dev@openjdk.java.net <mailto:mlvm-dev@openjdk.java.net>
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev
_______________________________________________
mlvm-dev mailing list
mlvm-dev@openjdk.java.net
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev
_______________________________________________
mlvm-dev mailing list
mlvm-dev@openjdk.java.net
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev
