----- Original Message ----- From: "Remy Maucherat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Tomcat Developers List" <tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2005 1:49 AM
Subject: Re: cvs commit: jakarta-tomcat-connectors/jk/java/org/apache/jk/common ChannelNioSocket.java
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:billbarker 2005/04/23 21:27:42
Modified: jk/java/org/apache/jk/common ChannelNioSocket.java Log: Give up on switching between blocking/non-blocking Sockets, also move
the Accecpt into the Poller instead of its own thread.
This is still very much experimental, and nobody should even dream of using it in production.
Testing on Windows, it's very flakey. On Solaris, it's stable enough, but ChannelSocket is about 25% faster.
Does it do about the same of behavior as the APR endpoint ? (I didn't try it - I run Windoze for my dev, BTW ;) )
ChannelNioSocket works ok on Windows on low concurrency, but what's the point? ;-). After that, NIO starts throwing weird NPEs.
I haven't tried the APR endpoint on Solaris yet. If I get some time, I'll try compiling it and give it a spin. However the NIO tests suggest that PoolTcpEndpoint will win. There is just not much downside to simply increasing maxThreads on Solaris, but the additional syncs and context-switching do cost.
I would like AJP and HTTP to share more code. Do you think that NIO is a better choice, or should it remain an experiment ? To me, it seems less mature, robust and portable (the most annoying problem probably being that to get bugfixes and feature updates, you need to upgrade the JVM), but I don't have a whole lot of experience.
Most of the split was because Costin designed Jk-Coyote around the JNI stuff. Also, at the time PoolTcpEndpoint didn't support the master-slave model he settled on.
Actually, I'm thinking of leaving ChannelNioSocket in mostly to have something to point to when people show up on the list asking "why doesn't Tomcat use this great NIO stuff?". ;-) The non-blocking io actually works well for AJP (since all of the reads and writes are at most 8K). Using ByteBuffer vs byte [] seems mostly a matter of taste :). Otherwise, I agree that NIO should probably remain an experiment for now.
Rémy
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This message is intended only for the use of the person(s) listed above as the intended recipient(s), and may contain information that is PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not an intended recipient, you may not read, copy, or distribute this message or any attachment. If you received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and then delete all copies of this message and any attachments.
In addition you should be aware that ordinary (unencrypted) e-mail sent through the Internet is not secure. Do not send confidential or sensitive information, such as social security numbers, account numbers, personal identification numbers and passwords, to us via ordinary (unencrypted) e-mail.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
