I guess all application servers are their own mechanism. Having a standard
to do so would be great.
I'd like as well to define the concurrency definition on non @Asynchronous
methods.
+1
Jean-Louis
Le 16 avril 2012 17:34, Adam Bien <abien_at_adam-bien.com> a écrit :
> Even better! My minimum requirement is @Asynchronous :)
> On 16.04.2012, at 09:21, Carlo de Wolf wrote:
>
> > Why not have @MaxConcurrency be applicable to all (remote) client
> invocations?
> >
> > Carlo
> >
> > On 04/15/2012 08:57 PM, Adam Bien wrote:
> >> Hi Experts,
> >>
> >> I would re-activate my proposal of concurrency throttling of EJBs:
> https://java.net/jira/browse/EJB_SPEC-9
> >>
> >> There should be a way to throttle the ThreadPool responsible for the
> execution of @Asynchronous methods.
> >>
> >> I would like to propose @MaxConcurrency annotation to set the maximum
> amount of parallel threads executing an @Asynchronous method.
> >>
> >> In addition I would also like to standardize the @MaxPoolSize
> annotation. With this annotation even synchronous @Stateless session beans
> could be throttled.
> >>
> >> In case all instances / threads are busy, I would expect an immediate
> exception on the client side.
> >>
> >> This is one of the most popular questions according EJB 3.1 in
> workshops...
> >>
> >> any thoughts?
> >>
> >> adam
> >
>
> workshops.adam-bien.com
> blog.adam-bien.com
> about.adam-bien.com
>
> Author of:
> "Real World Java EE Night Hacks", "Real World Java EE
> Patterns--Rethinking Best Practices"
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>