Hi James, IMHO the Read/Write lock stuff is a very cool idea, it rocks!!! Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ http://www.99soft.org/ On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 5:09 PM, James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 10:58 AM, Gary Gregory > <ggreg...@seagullsoftware.com> wrote: >> >> I thought we said that pools settings should be configurable. The current >> Config root class has setters. >> >> Are we saying that, yes, pools are configurable post-creation but not >> through config objects? Should config objects be cloned when passed in a >> constructor then? >> > > My opinion is that the config objects should be immutable. Then, you > don't have to worry about synchronization issues. You'd just have the > reconfigure(Config) method (which is called by the constructor). The > reconfigure method would take care of making sure it locks down > (synchronizes) everything while he does all the reconfiguring of the > pool. > > I would probably suggest a read/write lock. Folks who want to borrow > an object from the pool or return and object to the pool would be > obtaining the "read" lock. When you are in the middle of > reconfiguring the pool, you'd obtain the "write" lock. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
