On Saturday 25 January 2003 22:47, you wrote: > On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 08:15:26PM -0500, Gianni Johansson wrote: > > > > 1) This doesn't belong in Fred's JVM. We have enough problems > > > > undertanding/bounding fred's resource consumption as it is. > > > > > > I agree - that is what plugin architectures are for. > > > > What do you mean? > > > > When you add a servlet to the mainport configuration setting you are > > running it in fred's JVM. > > Where else are people plugging things in? > > Well, I thought you were worried about something running in Fred's JVM > by default. When you next talk to the press and mention Freenet as a replacement for internet radio (which it is not), everyone will turn it on and try to run it for a while until the network collapses.
> Surely it is better to have one instance of the JVM > running, rather than two? > No. You don't want fred to have to compete with code that is running continuous FEC decoding in the same JVM. Perhaps your machine is so powerful that you haven't noticed, but we can't get fred to run with reasonable CPU usage *all by itself*. 0) If the code runs in it's own JVM then when it crashes it doesn't take down fred. 1)Fred has the help of the OS scheduler in competing with it for resources. 2)If all requests go over FCP fred can better defend itself from clients that make unreasonable requests. --gj _______________________________________________ devl mailing list devl at freenetproject.org http://hawk.freenetproject.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
