On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 08:02:20PM +0000, Ted Dunning wrote: > On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 7:57 PM, Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > No. But it is easy to code up some warmup in the startup part of the > > life > > > cycle. That should be a penalty paid once when the server starts, not > > later > > > on the first request. In the worst case, you can build a simple startup > > > script that starts the server and then hits a few URL's to get the > > classes > > > loaded. You can also do soft start with your load balancer. > > > > Yeah and watch it fall over when you bounce it under load or when > > you are trying to dynamically manage load by quickly starting > > instances to respond to load surges. Startup time can be important > > in online applications. Luc mentioned other examples as well. > > > > I have helped design and build a top 25 web site. I understand these > issues. This isn't a big deal and the original comment about web-sites > launching a JVM and reloading classes several times a second is complete off > base. > > > > > > > > Seriously. This is a total red herring. > > > > Not to the users who reported the problem. We have a fix.
Yes, you have a fix, but not to the issue that was reported (see my original post). > I am +1 > > on the code in trunk and ++1 on ending this discussion. -1 Please prove that 100 ms does matter in a real use-case; without imagining that you can crash a web server with the initialization of "FastMath"... Not precluding that for some people it might be "nice" to be as fast as possible, just for the sake of it; if so, the tables should nevertheless be separate from the "real" source code (cf. previous post). > > Read what *I* wrote. I was talking about the supposed multi times per > second JVM restart "issue". That isn't a real issue. > > As I pointed out in the next paragraph, a long startup for an interactive > app is an issue, but there seems to be some confusion about how much > difference this change will make. Exactly, I say that 100 ms is not "long". Even when launching a command-line "application" such as the mini-benchmark used to time a single function call, I get the output "fast enough" (I hit enter and it's there). Gilles --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
