Kohsuke Kawaguchi wrote:
> Vivek Pandey wrote:
>
>> I would thnik so, otherwise we need to create new transport pipe for
>> every request.
>
>
> They already have to manage multiple pipelines anyway, so I don't
> think it's too much trouble for them to manage multiple
> encoders/decoders.
>
> And I thought it does allow encoder/decoder to reuse some of the most
> costly objects.
>
Yep. Thats right.
> Besides, some transport are single-threaded (such as an e-mail
> transport based on POP3), so I think it makes a good design sense to
> make them non-reentrant.
>
I think this design choice is more driven because of some expensive
objects. I wonder with the pipes, encoders/decoders being non-reentrant
how many of such instances will be there, for example if client is
invoking lots of thread!
> I think what we need is a clone method on pipe, encoder, and decoder,
> so that whoever invokes the pipe can clone it if necessary.
>
ok.
-vivek.
--
Vivek Pandey
Web Services Standards and Technologies
Sun Microsystems Inc.