Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: releasing flex token in java

  1. #1

    releasing flex token in java


    We are using jmsl product with flexlm licence.
    We are running financial backtest that can last many hours (up top 76), but we only need the jmsl library for a very short time at the beginning of the backtest.

    The problem is that the flex token seems never to be released until the jvm stop.

    Is there a way to release the token in java ?

    many thks.

  2. #2
    Senior Member ed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    This is actually an artifact of the FlexLM software we use for license management. They one generally needs to think about runtime licenses with IMSL is that the "application" requires a license. So when your application first makes an IMSL call, a license is requested and checked out. The application holds this license until it ends. In the case of C and Fortran, the end of the application is clearly defined. But in the case of Java, it's really the JVM instance that has the license.

    Unfortunately, there's no way to release this license from within the product. We have had at least one previous request regarding this issue and a Change Request has been filed to investigate for a future release.

    If your ability to use the product effectively is limited by this behavior, please get in touch with your account manager, and we may be able to find a solution together.

    The first 90% of the code accounts for the first 90% of the development time. The remaining 10% of the code accounts for the other 90% of the development time.

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006

    I second the need for a programmatic way to release licenses, not just in Java, but in all languages/platforms.

    The increased availability of multiprocessing machines (dual-core, multiple processors, etc) makes the single-process license prohibitively restrictive.

    Of course, a clever programmer can work around it by using multiple threads instead of processes, but that only begs the question: what is acheived by this licensing scheme to begin with?

    Some kind of license check in/out mechanism could prove useful. Alternatively, the "uncounted" license serves a similar function without the added programming overhead. I'd suggest that VNI drop the single-process license scheme entirely and move to "uncounted" single-machine licensing in its place.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts