Number of Apps per JVM

[Mark Roos]

Both the Waratek and IBM multi Tenant JVMs demonstrate that the options of 
one app per jvm
or many apps per jvm can be efficient and isolated.  But I believe that 
both of these require that
objects be serialized in order to be sent between apps.  My question was 
about avoiding the cost 
of this serialization.

My use case is one of the parallelization of a operation across several 
cores. It would be convenient
to split the tasks to each core while enforcing cross core immutable state 
but allowing in core
mutable state.  Kilim approaches this by controlling the references 
between objects such that one
can transfer an object to another sandbox by ensuring that the objects are 
only referenced via the
roots of the sandbox ( thus making them invisible within other sandboxes). 
 One could think of
this as relinking a set of objects.  Squeak ( a Smalltalk ) had the 
concept of image segments which
would be like a GC/heap region.  These could be connected and disconnected 
via a single reference.
All of these seem to require an object structure designed to support this. 
  What I was wondering
is if anyone as seen an alternative approach which would not need to know 
which objects may need
to be moved. 

Think of this as an Actor model where objects can be passed as parts of 
messages

thx
mark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/mlvm-dev/attachments/20140113/15a0009d/attachment.html