Hi Adam,
I guess Abhishek is referring to the same semantics that several well known
connections pools have. They often have, min, max, and initial too.
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 9:13 AM, Adam Bien <abien_at_adam-bien.com> wrote:
> Hi Abhishek,
>
> I like your proposal even more. I started with the minimum requirement of
> having at least the max-size configured.
>
> What is the difference between initial and min?
>
> cheers,
>
> adam
> > On 18.01.2016, at 16:40, arjan tijms <arjan.tijms_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I don't have a very strong preference, but with 3 annotations, one could
> also consider a @Pool or @Pooled annotation with 3 attributes
> >
> > E.g.
> >
> > @Pooled(
> > min = 10,
> > initial = 10,
> > max = 20
> > )
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 4:33 PM, Abhishek Gupta <abhirockzz_at_gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Definitely +1. Good to see some EJB related discussions :-)
> >
> > The above mentioned annotations would help
> >
> > 1. Tune EJBs in a standard manner
> > 2. Sending across a clear message w.r.t one of the most important EJB
> features e.g. @Stateless does not really say that you also have throtlling
> & pooling capabilities (one needs to mention it explicitly)
> >
> > I also suggest including another annotation: @javax.ejb.InitialPoolSize.
> This will aid in eager initialisation (just like Singleton EJBs) and ensure
> having enough firepower 'in the tank' to begin with
> >
> > Thanks
> > Abhishek
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Abhishek
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Latest (mini) book ! | Java Caching Refcard | Java EE Blog
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 1:36 PM, arjan tijms <arjan.tijms_at_gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > +1
> >
> > Pool settings as well as an @TransactionTimeout would be quite handy
> indeed.
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 8:58 AM, <johan_at_lodgon.com> wrote:
> > +1
> >
> > This really can save lots of boilerplate code in projects.
> >
> >
> >
>
>