Ugo Cei dijo: > Antonio Gallardo wrote: >> This mean another "official" forking of the Rhino engine. That also mean >> users of BEA and IBM AS will have 2 flowscript engine there, right? The >> current deployed with org.mozilla.* and our one org.cocoondev.* >> >> This can be easily traduced in more memory usage, etc. Is this correct? >> >> Currently, I am -0 because of these concerns. > > If I understand correctly, without this change, Weblogic and Websphere > users won't be able to use continuations at all (and maybe even > flowscript), so the point about more memory usage sounds moot, doesn't it?
The memory is just 1 issue and is not the main point. See the "etc" behind it. The point is about performance. AFAIK, in a multi-thread AS a 1 ms can make a diference, is n't? The other think is what other packages BEA and IBM forked? Will we need to add another forking to support them? Things are not clear to me. BTW, I don't use any of them and after this issue I think it will be hard I start to using them. I know it is not important if I use them or not. It is not the point. Fortunately, there are other options, ie: JBoss, right? ;-) > Besides, if you're running either WL or WS and you're paying either the > license fees or the army of consultants that it takes to run them > properly, you wouldn't mind a few bucks for a couple extra RAM modules > ;-). It is true the cheap memory can save many asses here. But to me this also sound an alarm: It is worth to use them at all? > Ah, by the way, I'm +1 on what Christopher suggested. Sorry, but, I am still -0. :-( Best Regards, Antonio Gallardo
