Woof! On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 11:32:56 -0400, M. Ranganathan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One will be called symmitron and another will be called > sipxbridge. Each will have its own process descriptor and be managed > independent of the other. Both will use the same nat traversal library > ( they will share code ) but they will run as independent processes. > I understand the desire for independance (It's almost July 4th, after all!) but starting up multiple JVMs just to enable independant control is something I'm against. If Java "services" can share a JVM, I'm all for the memory savings that can provide. Independant control can be achieved differently, with RPC calls or other comms environment than signals (which is what is used today). Please recall the "stdin/stdout" control mechanism I outlined as a possible part of the new Process manager. That would be one way of controlling multiple "services" inside one JVM. --Woof! _______________________________________________ sipx-dev mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev
