I would like to see the spooler change to have a single
thread reading from the spool, and use worker threads to run
the processors. That should simplify, if not eliminate, a
lot of the synchronization/locking issues.
One of my notes points to a JMS (ActiveMQ) based spoolmanager.
Now that we added derby it would be also easier (ActiveMQ default db is
Derby, too).
I'm not sure how much work is needed for JMS compared to the patch to make
the current spoolmanager single threaded.
If feasible/"easy enough" do we like more the JMS solution?
Just curious: isn't JMS an overkill just to solve a threading problem?
Thanks in advance,
Ahmed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
