I posted this 2 days back, but it probably went un-noticed in the deluge of posts, so here's another shot.
If my corrections are wrong, then it probably means that at least the Non-Persistent Scheduler is defective. ----- Original Message ----- From: Kelvin Tan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Turbine Users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 12:33 PM Subject: Documentation for Scheduler Service At http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine/turbine-2/services/scheduler-service.html, the example given for a sample ScheduledJob is public class SimpleScheduledTask extends ScheduledJob { private int taskcount = 0; /** * Constructor */ public SimpleScheduledTask() { //do Task initialization here } /** * Run the Jobentry from the scheduler queue. * From ScheduledJob. * * @param job The job to run. */ public void run( JobEntry job ) throws Exception { Log.note("Scheduled job " + job.getId() + " : " + "task: " + job.getTask() + " ran @: " + new Date(System.currentTimeMillis()).toString() + " taskcount " + taskcount ); //iterate the task counter taskcount++; } } The expected output is the String given with an incrementing taskcount. However, in WorkerThread, jobs are actually executed like ScheduledJob sc = (ScheduledJob) Class.forName( je.getTask()).newInstance(); sc.execute(je); and new WorkerThreads are instantiated each time a job executes (they are, aren't they?). This means that taskcount will never get to increment since the variable is re-initialized each time the job runs. Making taskcount a static variable would be more correct, I think. Otherwise, there's another reason why my test case isn't running correctly. :) Regards, Kelvin Tan Relevanz Pte Ltd http://www.relevanz.com 180B Bencoolen St. The Bencoolen, #04-01 S(189648) Tel: 238 6229 Fax: 337 4417 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
