-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Pid,
On 10/11/2011 12:58 AM, Pid * wrote:
> On 10 Oct 2011, at 23:36, Christopher Schultz
> wrote:
>> "limit to X number", and negative integers mean "all available
>> processors minus X".
>
> My first instinct was to say "that's crazy, fool!" but
Christopher Schultz schrieb:
>-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>Hash: SHA1
>
>Pid,
>
>On 10/10/2011 2:28 PM, Pid wrote:
>> On 10/10/2011 10:30, sasc sasc wrote:
>>> +1 for this enhancement. With configurable number of threads
>>> (default: Runtime.getRuntime().availableProcessors())
>>
>> Su
On 10 Oct 2011, at 23:36, Christopher Schultz
wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Pid,
>
> On 10/10/2011 2:28 PM, Pid wrote:
>> On 10/10/2011 10:30, sasc sasc wrote:
>>> +1 for this enhancement. With configurable number of threads
>>> (default: Runtime.getRuntime().availa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Pid,
On 10/10/2011 2:28 PM, Pid wrote:
> On 10/10/2011 10:30, sasc sasc wrote:
>> +1 for this enhancement. With configurable number of threads
>> (default: Runtime.getRuntime().availableProcessors())
>
> Such a change might prove unwelcome for people
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Rainer,
On 10/10/2011 2:16 PM, Rainer Jung wrote:
> I think the goal is interesting, but not with a trivial
> implementation. So e.g. it would not be OK to serve the root
> context instead of /myapp only because the root context is already
> deployed
On 10/10/2011 19:16, Rainer Jung wrote:
> On 10.10.2011 19:35, Felix Schumacher wrote:
>> Am Montag, den 10.10.2011, 11:30 +0200 schrieb sasc sasc:
>>> +1 for this enhancement. With configurable number of threads (default:
>>> Runtime.getRuntime().availableProcessors())
>>>
>>> I would also like to
On 10/10/2011 19:16, Rainer Jung wrote:
> On 10.10.2011 19:35, Felix Schumacher wrote:
>> Am Montag, den 10.10.2011, 11:30 +0200 schrieb sasc sasc:
>>> +1 for this enhancement. With configurable number of threads (default:
>>> Runtime.getRuntime().availableProcessors())
>>>
>>> I would also like to
On 10/10/2011 10:30, sasc sasc wrote:
> +1 for this enhancement. With configurable number of threads (default:
> Runtime.getRuntime().availableProcessors())
Such a change might prove unwelcome for people who've got (however
fragile) configurations which rely on apps starting in a specific order.
On 10.10.2011 19:35, Felix Schumacher wrote:
> Am Montag, den 10.10.2011, 11:30 +0200 schrieb sasc sasc:
>> +1 for this enhancement. With configurable number of threads (default:
>> Runtime.getRuntime().availableProcessors())
>>
>> I would also like to expand/add to this request: Making contexts av
Am Montag, den 10.10.2011, 11:30 +0200 schrieb sasc sasc:
> +1 for this enhancement. With configurable number of threads (default:
> Runtime.getRuntime().availableProcessors())
>
> I would also like to expand/add to this request: Making contexts available
> for request processing continuously as t
+1 for this enhancement. With configurable number of threads (default:
Runtime.getRuntime().availableProcessors())
I would also like to expand/add to this request: Making contexts available
for request processing continuously as they are started. This in combination
with parallel startup, would si
11 matches
Mail list logo