hat is lost when the thread is killed is the
> request, it would not if there
> are interdependencies between threads.
>
> Samuel
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Michael Bilow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 13:36
> To: '[EMAIL PRO
Hello Samuel and Michael...
--On Sunday, May 13, 2001 3:51 PM -0400 Samuel Bucholtz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I know that we here have scripts that kill iPlanet threads automatically
> to keep the app server from dying,
> I do not know if these scripts are sending TERMs or KILLs though. This
.
Samuel
-Original Message-
From: Michael Bilow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 13:36
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: [JBoss-user] jBoss architecture question
No, no... I agree that, in the abstract, it makes sense to send the TERM
signal only to the
stop threads, and do the proper thing when
> it received a signal, there is no reason to consider the application
> unstable, just because the threads ignore signals.
>
> Samuel
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Michael Bilow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Sunday,
just because the threads ignore signals.
Samuel
-Original Message-
From: Michael Bilow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 2:10
To: List: jBoss users
Subject: Re: [JBoss-user] jBoss architecture question
On 2001-05-11 at 22:09 -0500, danch wrote:
> Jim Arch
On 2001-05-11 at 22:09 -0500, danch wrote:
> Jim Archer wrote:
* * *
> > All the threads also raise a shutdown question. We have written an
> > init.d script to gracefully start and stop jBoss as a server task, in
> > the same manner as other Debian processes. If the script issues a kill
> > t
Jim Archer wrote:
> Hello..
>
> --On Friday, May 11, 2001 8:25 AM +0100 "Kimpton,C (Chris)"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>> So if each java process I see is a thread within the same VM,
>>> does anyone
>>> know what causes a new thread to be started?
>>>
>>
>> new Thread();
>>
>> ;-)
>
Hello..
--On Friday, May 11, 2001 8:25 AM +0100 "Kimpton,C (Chris)"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> So if each java process I see is a thread within the same VM,
>> does anyone
>> know what causes a new thread to be started?
>>
>
> new Thread();
>
> ;-)
Yeah, OK...
> I presume you have a perfo
Hi,
>
> So if each java process I see is a thread within the same VM,
> does anyone
> know what causes a new thread to be started?
>
new Thread();
;-)
> Also, is there any way to know which of these are Hypersonic,
> which are
> Tomcat and which are jBoss?
Now you are talking...
Well
If your running 'embedded' tomcat, there's actually only one process
running. What you're seeing in top is an artifact of the Linux thread
model - each individual thread shows as a separate process. Really in
Linux the only difference between a process and a thread is all threads
in a process
OK, thanks very much Chris and Hunter. I'm running SUNs JDK 1.3.
So if each java process I see is a thread within the same VM, does anyone
know what causes a new thread to be started?
Also, is there any way to know which of these are Hypersonic, which are
Tomcat and which are jBoss?
Jim
--On
t; To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [JBoss-user] jBoss architecture question
>
> Hi All...
>
> I have read the architecture notes on the jBoss site, but I'm still
> wondering a few things about what jBoss does when it is run. I'm using
> jBoss 2.2.1 bundled with
Hi,
> -Original Message-
> From: Jim Archer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> My question is, are each of these a seperate VM or different
> processes
> running within the same VM?
See http://www.jguru.com/faq/view.jsp?EID=125066
>
> Also, what causes the number of java processes to c
Hi All...
I have read the architecture notes on the jBoss site, but I'm still
wondering a few things about what jBoss does when it is run. I'm using
jBoss 2.2.1 bundled with Tomcat on a Debian/Linux SMP machine. Currently,
I'm still running Hypersonic as bundled, so I guess there are three jav
14 matches
Mail list logo
