Sounds like you need a task queue and a single dispatcher thread. Write the metered messages to the task queue and let it do the temporal management. This can all be done with one thread. On Aug 25, 2013 11:57 AM, "Mike McKnight" <m...@mcknight4.com> wrote:
> In my case I have units on the ground that need to have messages throttled > when being sent to the units. In other words all of the queued write events > going to each unit need to be metered out in an temporal fashion. I have a > separate thread pool available that can expand to the number of units on > the ground, which is max around 50, and handles this metering process. > Message processing for all but WRITE events needs to be unfettered in any > way and can not be held up for writes being throttled. So for sure I need > another executor filter that handles all but WRITE events. > > I don't see how I can do this with a single executor filter. As events are > processed in order in a queue and if I am waiting on a write then > MESSAGE_RECEIVED events are not going to get processed. There are no > separate SessionTasksQueue for the OrderedThreadPoolExecutor, just the one > for all events waiting to be processed. > > Filter chain looks like this: > * codec > * inbound-filter (executor filter for all but WRITE events) > * write-throttle-filter (overrides filterWrite) > * outbound-filter (executor filter for WRITE events only) > On 08/23/2013 12:32 PM, Jon V. wrote: > >> What is the use case for having different thread pools for read and write >> events? >> >> Writes are already scheduled one they hit the worker. Not like your write >> process is going to slow down an already threaded read request. >> On Aug 22, 2013 5:52 PM, "Mike McKnight"<m...@mcknight4.com> wrote: >> >> I am just curious if there is a downside to this issue that I am not >>> seeing. I have seen this in my MINA application; I have inbound/outbound >>> executor filters as described in the issue and have seen where my inbound >>> threads are *sometimes* processing IoEventType.WRITE events. I don't see >>> any adverse effects of this, my messages are being put on the wire, but >>> am >>> checking in with the list to be sure. >>> >>> I am running mina-2.0.7. >>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/****jira/browse/DIRMINA-912<https://issues.apache.org/**jira/browse/DIRMINA-912> >>> <https:**//issues.apache.org/jira/**browse/DIRMINA-912<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-912> >>> > >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> Mike >>> >>> >
