Georg Rehfeld wrote: > Hi Dan, > > me: > >>>I still would insist on the correction of the missing wait/notify >>>issue, as I still believe that the extremly bad response times >>>under load are more caused by several threads executing tight >>>loops consuming most of the cpu time instead of simply waiting >>>and let the cpu to JBoss doing real work! >>> > > you: > >>It certainly can't help! >> > > Did you really mean it can NOT help? If so, could you explain? > But, as you have had a closer look, I consider it a typo. I meant that spinning the wheels like that can't be helping performance. Your suggested change would just about have to help. > > >>Actually, looking closer at the code, it's probably the mutex that we >>want to wait on in both cases - it is specific to the key involved. >> > > Is key here <==> Entity Beans PK, then it sounds promising! It's equivalent. I believe it's actuall a CacheKey (from org.jboss.util) which wraps the bean's PK to protect JBoss from badly implemented keys (hashCode and equals) > Does 'looking closer' mean, you are about to actually code it? > Which would be very nice, I still havn't seen much of the JBoss > code and are not at all the expert, as everybody can see from > the several errors I made in my attempt, waiting on the wrong > object, notifyAll instead of notify and still beeing confused > where to put the notify. > > regards > Georg > ___ ___ > | + | |__ Georg Rehfeld Woltmanstr. 12 20097 Hamburg > |_|_\ |___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] +49 (40) 23 53 27 10 > > > > _______________________________________________ > Jboss-development mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development >
Confidential e-mail for addressee only. Access to this e-mail by anyone else is unauthorized. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and destroy the original communication.
