StatelessProcessorFactoryFactory vs RequestSpecificProcessorFactoryFactory

[cbes02 <cb...@mac.com>]

In my application my handlers are already instantiated and maintain  
internal state. As such I don't want the processor factory to  
instantiate the handlers every time they are called.

I now have everything working as I want using StatelessProcessorFactory.

What I am confused about and request clarification on (in case I am  
misunderstanding and something may break in the future) is use of  
word 'stateless' in this context. My thinking is that if an object is  
instantiated every time and then executed (as with  
RequestSpecificProcessorFactory) then it can have no state, whereas  
an initialized singleton would by default have state - so why is this  
classified as stateless.

Hope my question is clear.

CB

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: xmlrpc-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: xmlrpc-dev-help@ws.apache.org

Re: StatelessProcessorFactoryFactory vs RequestSpecificProcessorFactoryFactory

[Jochen Wiedmann <jo...@gmail.com>]

On 4/19/07, cbes02 <cb...@mac.com> wrote:

> What I am confused about and request clarification on (in case I am
> misunderstanding and something may break in the future) is use of
> word 'stateless' in this context.

A stateless object refers to an object, which is able to process an
arbitrary number of requests in parallel, because it is stateless.

Jochen

-- 
My cats know that I am a loser who goes out for hunting every day
without ever returning as much as a single mouse. Fortunately, I've
got a wife who's a real champ: She leaves the house and returns within
half an hour, carrying whole bags full of meal.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: xmlrpc-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: xmlrpc-dev-help@ws.apache.org