We have a global configuration object that's expensive to create. In the past, we had only one instance per JVM and everything performed acceptably. The object contains a list of servers. Servers can be removed from the list at runtime if they go down, so the object needs some synchronization.
A coworker on another team read the "no statics, no synchronization" rule in the specification and has removed the synchronization and now creates a copy of the object per EJB. This kills performance.
The coworker is reluctant to revert the code until they are convinced that doing so would not violate the spec. I've explained that this is meant for bean providers, more specifically business objects that are expected to be transactional and unique across the entire application, not applications like this where it's acceptable to have multiple copies, but you want to limit the number for the sake of performance.
Can someone from Sun please chime in and provide the needed support to convince this person?
Thanks, Bob
=========================================================================== To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
