You're more than welcome.
Thanks Peter.
2006/4/26, Peter Rossbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi Henri,
>
> I have tomorrow a talk with Thorsten.
>
> Steps:
> Made a tomcat 5.5 port
> english doc
>
> After these steps we can contribute it easier to ASF and more people
> can test it :-)
>
> Peter
>
>
Hi Henri,
I have tomorrow a talk with Thorsten.
Steps:
Made a tomcat 5.5 port
english doc
After these steps we can contribute it easier to ASF and more people
can test it :-)
Peter
Am 26.04.2006 um 09:13 schrieb Henri Gomez:
Well the extra memory could be a penalty, but what I like to s
Well the extra memory could be a penalty, but what I like to see in
future Tomcat impl, will be support for many instances ready to
massive hosting.
There was a thread about this some weeks ago, with a nice piece of
code from Germany, wonder what we could do to use it or include it in
Tomcat main
Costin Manolache wrote:
On 4/25/06, Remy Maucherat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Costin Manolache wrote:
Not sure what is the plan for commons-modeler, I think it is worth to
bring it back to tomcat or fork a separate implementation
Modeler is now in the tomcat.util package in the
Hmm... Sharing redundant MBeanInfo's shouldn't be that hard to wedge in.
Unfortunately, I don't know when I'll have time to take a proper look at
this...
--
Jess Holle
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Costin Manolache wrote:
Not sure what is the plan for commons-modeler, I think it is worth to
bring
On 4/25/06, Remy Maucherat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Costin Manolache wrote:
> > Not sure what is the plan for commons-modeler, I think it is worth to
> > bring it back to tomcat or fork a separate implementation
>
> Modeler is now in the tomcat.util package in the new repository, so you
> can t
Costin Manolache wrote:
I have to disagree with any statement like this - nobody can decide that his
use case is the 'main' use case for tomcat.
Yes, tomcat is used in a lot of production environments where speed
and manageability
are important. But it is also used by developers ( and I suspect
So ... rather than something small and fiesty ("Tomcat") perhaps the name
should be mega-gozo-zilla-raptor-cat, or similar?
Truth in advertising. :)
On 4/25/06, Jess Holle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Remy Maucherat wrote:
> [snip]
> > It is completely irrelevant compared to the memory usage o
Costin Manolache wrote:
Not sure what is the plan for commons-modeler, I think it is worth to
bring it back to tomcat or fork a separate implementation
Modeler is now in the tomcat.util package in the new repository, so you
can try to improve it if you'd like to. One first change I made is tha
I have to disagree with any statement like this - nobody can decide that his
use case is the 'main' use case for tomcat.
Yes, tomcat is used in a lot of production environments where speed
and manageability
are important. But it is also used by developers ( and I suspect for
each production site
y
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Abhi Karmos wrote:
Has anybody looked in the code where the DescriptorSupport class is
used? 22 thousand of these things is simply absurd. Nearly 100
thousand DescriptorSupport.ValueHolder objects is even crazier. My
guess is that the HashMap usage is related to the Descr
Abhi Karmos wrote:
Has anybody looked in the code where the DescriptorSupport class is used? 22
thousand of these things is simply absurd. Nearly 100 thousand
DescriptorSupport.ValueHolder objects is even crazier. My guess is that the
HashMap usage is related to the DescriptorSupport.
It is c
Hmm...
So model MBeans are not such a pancea after all :-)
They're certainly the most complex and unapproachable form of MBean,
which Commons Modeler tries to address, of course. I alway suspected
that they had an overtly heavy nature at runtime, though -- and it
appears that there is some t
Hi all,
Following up on this thread, we took a dump of the heap running tomcat 5.5.
There is no good reason for JMX to consume 9-10 Meg.
97,236 5,178,736 array of char
25,494 3,463,312 array of java/util/HashMap$Entry
105,908 3,389,056 java/util/HashMap$Entry
98,510 3,152,320
We're also using TC 3.3 on our production systems and are switching to TC 5.5.
The memory penalty is real but you'll be using up to date and actively
maintained stuff with TC 5.5.
Also you could try to reduce the AJP13 / HTTP 11 threads and remove
some JMX Listeners
2006/4/19, Abhi Karmos <[EMAI
Hello all,
Sorry, could not find an answer on tomcat-users.
We run tomcat inside an embedded system and we are planning to upgrade the
tomcat version from 3.3.1 to 5.5.16. We noticed that the memory footprint of
a barebones tomcat 5.5 installation is 44 MB. Plain and simple Tomcat 3.3
used to ru
16 matches
Mail list logo
