>>NO. Actually STM doesn't make your servlet non-MT at all. It only means
>>that one request goes to one INSTANCE of your servlet. The servlet engine
>>can still create multiple instances of your servlet and if you have a
>>static variable in there, you will need to syncronize it. STM is a bad
>>stupid thing and you should never use it. Learning MT is much better and
>>easier.
I understand that STM is not a good thing - just trying to draw a
distinction. I do have some MT experience in C++ and in Java, but I wouldn't
call myself an expert.
>>Anyway, what are you trying to get at here? What exactly do you see as a
>>problem? The overall design of Turbine is about 3 years old now and is
>>well proven to work and be efficient. Unless you have a real problem, this
>>discussion is moot since nothing will be changing. :-)
No big deal - just trying to see how the world fits together :-)
On the Turbine deployments question, has Turbine been deployed in a large
transaction volume environment? I know metrics are a hard thing to pin down,
but do you have a general sense of it's range of use?
Again, not asking for any change, just trying to understand what Turbine is
and what it's capable of.
Thanks!
Sam
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 01, 2000 9:58 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Multiple servlets vs. Pages
>
> Right - I understand that, unless your servlet implements
SingleThreadModel,
> it is a multi-threaded object.
NO. Actually STM doesn't make your servlet non-MT at all. It only means
that one request goes to one INSTANCE of your servlet. The servlet engine
can still create multiple instances of your servlet and if you have a
static variable in there, you will need to syncronize it. STM is a bad
stupid thing and you should never use it. Learning MT is much better and
easier.
> I was just wondering if there was any advantage (or maybe a disadvantage)
to
> having multiple multi-threaded objects processing requests instead of a
> single multi-threaded object. I'm not hugely familiar with the ins and
outs
> of multi-threading.
I doubt it would help anything and would only add more complexity to
things so that is a major negative anyways.
> In the 2.1+ Servlet spec, for instance, there is one RequestDispatcher per
> servlet - would requests be dispatched more efficiently by having multiple
> dispatchers?
>
> Sam
It wouldn't really make a difference. Look at the ScreenLoader...it is
as efficient as it is going to get. Also, it is necessary for the Turbine
servlet to control things so having multiple requests going through
multiple copies of Turbine servlet in memory really won't save you
anything.
Also Turbine has to support 2.0 and higher until Tomcat is more widely
tested and stable. Once Tomcat replaces JServ, then I will be willing to
drop 2.0 support.
Anyway, what are you trying to get at here? What exactly do you see as a
problem? The overall design of Turbine is about 3 years old now and is
well proven to work and be efficient. Unless you have a real problem, this
discussion is moot since nothing will be changing. :-)
-jon
--
Scarab -
Java Servlet Based - Open Source
Bug/Issue Tracking System
<http://scarab.tigris.org/>
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
