|
> I thought using named activation groups was supposed > to help conserve resources. Wouldn't that depend on the type of resource you want to conserve? It requires more CPU time to create a new activation group when the program is called, and delete it after the program ends. But using new activation ensures that files are closed and memory is released when the program ends. Is the goal to conserve memory or CPU time? Isn't it a trade-off? Named activation ensures that your program remains active, after control is returned to the HTTP Server. But you need to take into account that program memory isn't released (or initialized) between calls. And, if your program was called from 20 separate HTTP Server threads, then 20 instances of the program will be active. Some people call that an uncontrolled memory leak ;-) Nathan M. Andelin www.relational-data.com Copyright (c) 2002 Nathan M. Andelin, all rights reserved.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.
midrange.com
