[jax-rs-spec users] [jsr339-experts] Re: Re: Re: Overhead of AsyncResponse

From: Santiago Pericas-Geertsen <>
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 08:36:48 -0500

On Nov 8, 2012, at 7:50 PM, Bill Burke <> wrote:

> On 11/8/2012 1:39 PM, Markus KARG wrote:
>>>> @Bill, why do you think your's is 'better' than handing the long
>>> running task to another thread, especially one from a different thread
>>> pool?
>>> I don't have a problem with saying this is 'better' or not. I do have
>>> a problem with saying that this is wrong, because its not. Defining
>>> and configuring multiple thread pools can be a burden on both the admin
>>> and developer, not to mention the extra code the developer has to
>>> write.
>> But Bill, only if the programmer puts the burden into a second thread pool,
>> the administrator can adjust the behaviour of the container by tuning the
>> pools differently.
> In my experience, admins want *less* things to configure, not *more*.

 I agree. However, I think this depends on the default size of the HTTP request thread pool in the container. In many cases, this number is not large enough to handle lots of JAX-RS async threads and admin intervention is absolutely required to improve utilization.

-- Santiago