On 10/14/09 13:59, Bill Shannon wrote:
> June.Parks_at_sun.com wrote on 10/14/09 08:58:
>> On 10/13/09 16:05, Bill Shannon wrote:
>>> Nachiappan Veerappan Nachiappan wrote on 10/13/09 10:46 AM:
>>>
>>>> Dixie,
>>>>
>>>> In create-threadpool command man page the option --workqueues (V2) has
>>>> been changed to --max-queue-size in V3.
>>>> Please change that to --workqueues.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I don't understand. Please change *what* to "--workqueues"?
>>>
>>> Why was the name of the option changed incompatibly between v2 and v3?
>>> Did you mean that you were going to change the code to rename the
>>> option
>>> to be compatible with v2?
>>>
>> Behind the scenes the num-work-queues attribute has been removed and
>> max-queue-size has been added in v3. The Grizzly engineers have the
>> details. Perhaps --workqueues should be a no-op. It would be
>> confusing to use --workqueues for the max-queue-size attribute,
>> because --workqueues accepted a number of queues while max-queue-size
>> accepts a number of bytes.
>
>
> Nachiappan Veerappan Nachiappan wrote on 10/13/09 16:54:
> > Bill Shannon wrote:
> >> Nachiappan Veerappan Nachiappan wrote on 10/13/09 10:46 AM:
> >>
> >>> Dixie,
> >>>
> >>> In create-threadpool command man page the option --workqueues (V2)
> has
> >>> been changed to --max-queue-size in V3.
> >>> Please change that to --workqueues.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I don't understand. Please change *what* to "--workqueues"?
> >>
> > The create-threadpool command man page which was sent for review had
> the
> > option --workqueues changed to --max-queue-size. So i requested
> Dixie to
> > change that to --workqueues, because the command implementation has
> > --workqueues as option name.
> >> Why was the name of the option changed incompatibly between v2 and v3?
> >>
> > The name of the option was not changed in the command implementation.
> > There is no incompatibility issue with regards to command
> implementation
> > between v2 and v3. All the options have the same name as in V2.
>
>
> Which of the above is correct?
You can verify for yourself that num-work-queues doesn't exist and
max-queue-size does by running Tim Quinn's ConfigAnalyzer tool:
http://wiki.glassfish.java.net/Wiki.jsp?page=DomainXMLv3Structure
As for what the create-threadpool command does, I'd suggest making
--workqueues a no-op and adding an option with a name like
--maxqueuesize or --max-queue-size. (Option names without spaces are
what we've used in the past, and they're slightly shorter, but if you
want to move toward having new options match their attribute names, I
won't object.)
The units for max-queue-size are messages, not bytes as I stated previously.
June
>
> Hopefully you didn't keep the option name the same but change its
> semantics.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: admin-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: admin-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>