Re: [infinispan-dev] Remoting package refactor

That's exactly what I suggested. No config gives you a shared global thread pool for all caches. Those caches which need a separate pool can do that via configuration (and of course also programmatically) On 06/11/14 20:31, Tristan Tarrant wrote: > My opinion is that we should aim for less configuration, i.e. > threadpools should mostly have sensible defaults and be shared by > default unless there are extremely good reasons for not doing so. > > Tristan > > On 06/11/14 19:40, Radim Vansa wrote: >> I second the opinion that any threadpools should be shared by default. >> There are users who have hundreds or thousands of caches and having >> separate threadpool for each of them could easily drain resources. And >> sharing resources is the purpose of threadpools, right? >> >> Radim >> >> On 11/06/2014 04:37 PM, Bela Ban wrote: >>> #1 I would by default have 1 thread pool shared by all caches >>> #2 This global thread pool should be configurable, perhaps in the >>> <global> section ? >>> #3 Each cache by default uses the gobal thread pool >>> #4 A cache can define its own thread pool, then it would use this one >>> and not the global thread pool >>> >>> I think this gives you a mixture between ease of use and flexibility in >>> configuring pool per cache if needed >>> >>> On 06/11/14 16:23, Pedro Ruivo wrote: >>>> On 11/06/2014 03:01 PM, Bela Ban wrote: >>>>> On 06/11/14 15:36, Pedro Ruivo wrote: >>>>>> * added a single thread remote executor service. This will handle the >>>>>> FIFO deliver commands. Previously, they were handled by JGroups incoming >>>>>> threads and with a new executor service, each cache can process their >>>>>> own FIFO commands concurrently. >>>>> +1000. This allows multiple updates from the same sender but to >>>>> different caches to be executed in parallel, and will speed thing up. >>>>> >>>>> Do you intend to share a thread pool between the invocations handlers of >>>>> the various caches, or do they each have their own thread pool ? Or is >>>>> this configurable ? >>>>> >>>> That is question that cross my mind and I don't have any idea what would >>>> be the best. So, for now, I will leave the thread pool shared between >>>> the handlers. >>>> >>>> Never thought to make it configurable, but maybe that is the best >>>> option. And maybe, it should be possible to have different max-thread >>>> size per cache. For example: >>>> >>>> * all caches using this remote executor will share the same instance >>>> <remote-executor name="shared" shared="true" max-threads=4.../> >>>> >>>> * all caches using this remote executor will create their own thread >>>> pool with max-threads equals to 1 >>>> <remote-executor name="low-throughput-cache" shared="false" >>>> max-threads=1 .../> >>>> >>>> * all caches using this remote executor will create their own thread >>>> pool with max-threads equals to 1000 >>>> <remote executor name="high-throughput-cache" shared="false" >>>> max-thread=1000 .../> >>>> >>>> is this what you have in mind? comments? >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Pedro >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> infinispan-dev mailing list >>>> infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev >>>> > _______________________________________________ > infinispan-dev mailing list > infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev >