Am Montag, den 10.07.2006, 21:05 -0600 schrieb Mike Heath: > On Mon, 2006-07-10 at 14:57 +0200, Joachim Draeger wrote: > > > > Maybe such idle connections could be handled by a special thread and if > > > any real work is starting on a connection, this one is handed over to a > > > worker thread? > > > > To allow many idle connections but limit the maximal possible server > > load, I have the idea of a central scheduler in mind. > > The scheduler keeps track of all running threads. > > If a session thread wants to run an expensive command it has to ask the > > scheduler first. > > The thread per connection model simply doesn't scale to the level that > would be needed for a decent IMAP server.
Why? There are reasons to limit the maximal number of simultaneously running threads. But what are the drawbacks of having one thread per connection? > Fortunately, this is a > problem that has already been solved by SEDA [1]. The Apache MINA > project [2] implements the good ideas of SEDA plus adds a number of > other good ideas providing a framework that is very easy to learn and > use. MINA also performs and scales very well. I just begun to read MINA docs to get an overview. How does it work internally? How does MINA know there is data waiting on a connection? Is it possible to let Java fire events in a new thread when data has arrived or are you polling every connection for new data? I had a fast look to a SEDA doc. Does MINA support prioritization? E.G.: NOOP is a cheap, LIST or APPEND are expensive commands. Maybe between ProtocolAcceptor and ProtocolHandler? Joachim --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
