When shutdown.sh is launched, TC performs a stop on all HttpConnectors, which themselves will stop their HttpProcessors.
It seems to that - while TC 403 waits "gracefully" for the work on a request to be finished (even forever) - TC 406 will wait 5 secs only and then shutdown without any respect to the work done in the processors background threads. I am afraid both ways can have undesired consequences. TC 403 will sometimes simply resist to shut down, while in a TC406 shutdown the work done in daemon threads will be interrupted without regards to the current states of the threads. The behavior of TC 406 is fine when there are only requests that can be handled fast. On the other hand, with large transactions I would prefer the behavior of TC 403 and pervent the requests from lasting too long by implementing configurable timeouts myself in the application code. Otherwise - or as it seems to be implemented in TC406 - we would risk to interrupt vulnerable operations, aren't we? So, my primary question is this one: Did I overlook a point, in particular: Is there a way to configure the shutdown behavior in TC 406 top wait for the background threads to finish? There was discussion on that topic last year ( http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=104454190600001&r=1&w=2), but I do not see where it had practical consequences in the code. Thanks Frank --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
