Without a feeder-policy, the MaxSize have no meaning : the pool never
grows.
In other words, having to define the size of something that don't grow
seemed confusing to me.
So I thought it was better to make it a part of feeder-policy-conf.
Then I choose to change the name from MaxSize to capacity to avoid
confusion with previous definition/place inside the xml.

If you consider this is more confusing, I can change it to:

<container-pool-conf>
        <MaximumSize>100</MaximumSize>
        
<feeder-policy>org.jboss.ejb.plugins.TimedInstancePoolFeeder</feeder-pol
icy>
        <feeder-policy-conf>
                <increment>10</increment>
                <period>500</period>
        </feeder-policy-conf>
</container-pool-conf>

Vincent.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On 
> Behalf Of Scott M Stark
> Sent: jeudi 27 d�cembre 2001 19:14
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] JBOSS EJB Container Bug ?!
> 
> 
> So why was the MaxSize dropped and a feeder pool capacity 
> config element added? The instance pool now grows to the 
> maximum concurrent use count and capacity is a redundant item 
> that should simply be the pool MaxSize value.
> 
> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Scott Stark
> Chief Technology Officer
> JBoss Group, LLC
> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Vincent Harcq" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'jeff andrews'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2001 9:06 AM
> Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] JBOSS EJB Container Bug ?!
> 
> 
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 2.4 the pool is never pre-feed with new instances, 
> instead the pool 
> > is feed after the use of an instance. And depending on the 
> x in 2.4.x, 
> > the pool may have a size of 1 all the time (no reuse at all).
> > There were good reasons for that linked to locking, read 
> archives if you
> > want more infos.
> >
> > Check this : 
> > 
> https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=496326&group_id=22866
> > &a
> > tid=381174
> >
> > It will work on Jboss 2.4.4 latest cvs but the dtd/xml 
> files were not 
> > changed, you need to change standardjboss.xml like this : 
> > <container-pool-conf>
> >
> > 
> <feeder-policy>org.jboss.ejb.plugins.TimedInstancePoolFeeder</feeder-p
> > ol
> > icy>
> > <feeder-policy-conf>
> > <capacity>100</capacity>
> > <increment>10</increment>
> > <period>500</period>
> > </feeder-policy-conf>
> > </container-pool-conf>
> >
> > Vincent.
> >
> > > Due to a previouse recommendation on one of these
> > > Forums,I have upgraded from JBoss_2.4.0-Tomcat_3.2.3
> > > to JBoss_2.4.3-Jetty_3.1.3-1. I'm running my JBoss
> > > on Linux.
> > >
> > > My problem/question is; How can I force the container
> > > pool
> > > configuration size of JBoss for a deployed stateless session bean 
> > > (for example)to not exceed a specified MaximumSize, based 
> on what I 
> > > have defined it to be in the jboss.xml file used for deployment??
> > >
> > > I tried many defferent kind of MaximumSizes, but it
> > > seems to me (from actual performance tests), that no
> > > matter what I specify as a MaximumSize for my deployed stateless 
> > > session bean, JBoss will always allocate a bean instance for each 
> > > request, even if the number of concurrent
> > > (client) requests to that bean (pool) exceeded the MaximumSize 
> > > specified for the bean's container pool configuration (specified 
> > > within jboss.xml at deployment time)....The same kind of 
> behaviour 
> > > problem was also found with deployed stateful session 
> beans type as 
> > > well as deployed entity beans type!!!
> > >
> > > For example:
> > > If I set the container pool configuration (of my bean) 
> MinimumSize = 
> > > 1, and MaximumSize = 1 (Meaning that there should ONLY be 
> one bean 
> > > instance in the pool to be shared among requesting 
> clients).....And 
> > > then I had 8 concurrent
> > > (clients) requests (at the same time). All 8 of those 
> requests were 
> > > able to get a remote reference to a bean instance (and 
> uses it) at 
> > > the same time. As apposed to all 8 sharing the single 
> bean instance 
> > > that should have ONLY bean in the pool...
> > >
> > > What am I messing ?!! Please help.... As I have bean 
> struggling with 
> > > this kind of a problem for over a month now.
> > >
> > > Jeff
> > >
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: 
> > > http://messenger.msn.com
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Jboss-development mailing list 
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Jboss-development mailing list 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
> 



_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com


_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development

Reply via email to