So what about this bug?
When the fix will be out?
-Original Message-
From: Mark Thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2006 1:34 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: StandartSession.accessCount bug?
Christopher Schultz wrote:
150ns per request (on my hardware
Michael Kantarovich wrote:
So what about this bug?
When the fix will be out?
The fix is in SVN now. It will be in 5.5.21. Release date for 5.5.21
is TBD.
Mark
-
To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org
To
Christopher Schultz wrote:
150ns per request (on my hardware) is still probably more than we want
to add to every request.
Really? If you say so...
Sorry. I was having a bad day. I was reading nano and thinking micro.
Various performance figures show a 'fast' request takes about 100
micro
Michael Kantarovich wrote:
Guys,
Did you consider to use java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicLong ?
No, since this is a Java 5 class and TC5 will run on a 1.4 JVM
providing a couple of additional JARs are present.
Mark
-
To
Mark,
Contended locks are much slower, so it's important to know.
It was contended. I have added the uncontended figures: 75ns and 225ns.
What do the two different values mean?
Also, did your +50ns figure mean that the /overhead/ was +50ns, or that
waiting for the other thread to release the
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2006 2:32 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: StandartSession.accessCount bug?
Michael Kantarovich wrote:
Guys,
Did you consider to use java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicLong ?
No, since this is a Java 5 class and TC5 will run on a 1.4 JVM
On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 08:38:37AM -0500, Christopher Schultz wrote:
Also, did your +50ns figure mean that the /overhead/ was +50ns, or that
waiting for the other thread to release the lock (which would include
execution of the method itself) took 50ms longer. Since those threads
cannot really
Michael Kantarovich wrote:
Hi,
I'm using version 5.5.12. I noticed that sometimes sessions doesn't
expire after a session-timeout.
What do you think?
That is http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37356
I have some ideas for a fix. It might get in to 5.5.21 if I get the
Mark,
Mark Thomas wrote:
Michael Kantarovich wrote:
Hi,
I'm using version 5.5.12. I noticed that sometimes sessions doesn't
expire after a session-timeout.
What do you think?
That is http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37356
Wow. Some real yelling and screaming going
Christopher Schultz wrote:
Can someone explain why unsynchronized data + threaded access !=
non-threadsafe code?
It doesn't take a genius to see that the accessCount variable there is
not threadsafe. And since Tomcat ought to be implemented such that
multiple threads can run successfully...
Christopher Schultz wrote:
I posted a comment on that bug that points out that you didn't provide
context for your numbers. Was that +50ms timing taken when you were
using a single thread, or multiple threads? Contended locks are much
slower, so it's important to know.
It was contended. I have
Thanks!
From: Mark Thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tue 10/31/2006 3:22 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: StandartSession.accessCount bug?
Michael Kantarovich wrote:
Hi,
I'm using version 5.5.12. I noticed that sometimes sessions doesn't
expire
Guys,
Did you consider to use java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicLong ?
From: Mark Thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tue 10/31/2006 7:13 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: StandartSession.accessCount bug?
Christopher Schultz wrote:
I posted
13 matches
Mail list logo