-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Mark,
On 12/15/16 2:44 PM, Mark Thomas wrote: > On 15/12/2016 19:35, Christopher Schultz wrote: >> John, >> >> On 12/14/16 10:01 PM, John D. Ament wrote: >>> I was feeling ambitious so I gave this a shot. Here's what I >>> changed: >>> https://github.com/johnament/tomcat85/commit/a0281b2d4e0fea7cb0f7a9d 3c >> >>> d1e750b48498ff2 > > That was pretty much what I was thinking. > >> My >> >> tack was going to be to create an ExecutorService that didn't >> dispatch. That way, less code has to change. > > Seems like more work. And doesn't solve the original problem of the > main thread holding a lock. No, it won't hold a lock. The (Abstract)ExecutorService just dispatches to the execute(Runnable job) method which can simply be: job.run() In that case, only one thread is ever involved: the thread that submitted the job. >> The problem with that approach is that, technically, the thread >> count can change for a variety of reasons and it should behave >> correctly at the time the contexts are started/stopped. >> >> I'd be interested in some comments on changing the behavior of >> Tomcat based upon the documentation of startStopThreads. For a >> value of "1", it explicitly says that 1 thread will be used. I'd >> be surprised if Tomcat were not to use a single (separate) thread >> rather than the main thread. >> >> Thing about this use-case: you have an embedded scenario where >> you want to launch Tomcat and you expect the start() call to >> return fairly soon so you can continue doing whatever you wanted >> to do. But instead of using the "1 thread" to start all the >> contexts, it's using the current thread and blocking you. > > That isn't what happens. The main thread always blocks until all > the container start threads have completed. Oh, well, then my use-case seems moot. Or, at least, no currently-running code will expect that behavior. >> I'm wondering if we need to invent a new magic number for this. >> Unfortunately, 0 is already taken. Perhaps we could use a >> non-numeric value for this special case. > > I don't see a need for that. I could imagine a need for that behavior, but there's an easier way for client code to handle it: launch Tomcat.start() from a separate thread. - -chris -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJYUwXHAAoJEBzwKT+lPKRYYNwP/36ZY+6XsIU2GgsihjHxCIPe kixjLj6GZXtc8mhoBWRVg3D16dhG62PhCSt813JIKFZMQQMd/zjuYFV6qqkZlv4D 4k0+wxVGLC9oWZA0awuAfWOiAYeHDUEe6Rwr67oUrmpxNcanvv9uk0URxYWEZjzj YS5ogX/lxJ/EuYIxz2aOptQ8q6W/fARQTsAdiIL3KWy2kjrDvWH/8V46oQxUwdXJ ilqnMPvCkTwAyKqeCug4bsDr4V/Xk7gjdqttb0qlntfLYay1WmWx1mAnTCD77V/H 6iCSviICy7dFrif4dfTHJ8SS2a8WxXMPR+ng8daCCaZE4GcNqs7bp1z254626xSw f/Ob2JPlD8aAsjM6WwAhtdlsE/0DzwkKm0Ski3ejt/A2Uh8V5KfaECyNgg1dRoak czJxxegVyUotkUjx7nL8nqW3dwb2wFJjhUVb/KKiZrl6TC8ME0Ix8UvcCx+Ldaoe KDVyJjqDSvEECwHLkCUTMbdX0wCJ2qMoH3ULDXMIEHpot9tkDQEa8iUAC9oS7dP0 zUmPY9syYwTBueRT0taSnpumrZ+iZkQIGPGEfX52kf90O9e8uGTFFSBMCoPpwI0M OfoH6A7g0I69tHiO05fFicj16Rf5BqoNQvKfn8CCzEJA41Uek9yTETGdlHUcbIZy NwWg49KyTN9G3o851TmW =QY5c -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
