On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 4:34 PM, George Neuner <gneun...@comcast.net> wrote: > Hi Jay, > > On 9/25/2014 1:04 PM, Jay McCarthy wrote: > >> If a Racket library is deliberately put into the servlet-namespace, does >> that streamline linking? > > Your assumption about the purpose of this is not correct. Anything in > the servlet-namespace will be shared between all servlets, and thus > not loaded per-servlet. > > > I think you misunderstood my question, but you may have answered it anyway. > > What I really was asking was whether each custodian was having to > individually load common Racket libraries [ web-server/*, net/*, etc. ] for > a new servlet rather than all servlet custodians sharing libraries that are > already loaded. Or, if not actually "loading" the libraries, then having to > go to disk to check dependencies. > > So if I create a shared servlet namespace and put, e.g., > "web-server/servlet" into it, would that in any way speed up starting a new > dynamically loaded servlet?
There is a very small set that is automatically shared: racket/base web-server/private/servlet web-server/http web-server/servlet/web ... web-server/servlet is NOT shared, nor is any net library or common racket library like racket/list. They are all totally unique per servlet. This, by the way, is part of why I don't recommend using dynamic servlets at all and suggest using serve/servlet. Jay -- Jay McCarthy http://jeapostrophe.github.io "Wherefore, be not weary in well-doing, for ye are laying the foundation of a great work. And out of small things proceedeth that which is great." - D&C 64:33 ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
