I have never used JMS/message-driven-beans as of yet, but considering it...
On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 8:35 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>wrote: > i'm quite again using JMS for local asynchronism generally > > not the goal of JMS IMO > > Romain Manni-Bucau > Twitter: @rmannibucau > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/ > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau > > > > 2012/12/16 Anthony Fryer <apfr...@hotmail.com>: > > Another change you could make to improve the performance of the method > > invoked by the timer, is instead of performing the actual database insert > > for each email in that method, instead write a message to a JMS queue. > Then > > create a message driven bean that processes the JMS messages and performs > > the actual database insert. > > > > > > > > -- > > View this message in context: > http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/Re-Why-are-Tomcat-s-threads-more-costly-than-background-threads-tp4659429p4659697.html > > Sent from the OpenEJB User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >
