directmemory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff MAURY <>
Subject Design questions
Date Fri, 25 May 2012 13:20:24 GMT

I have a couple of questions regarding the status of DirectMemory:

1) I am working on, I
followed the pattern that was applied to ByteBufferAllocator that is to
request objects (CacheService, MemoryService) to implement
However, the close method of this interface throws an IOException witch is
unlikely to happen in our memory world. So do you think we should keep
implementing this interface or just add a close method in the contract of
those objects ?

2) The various layer of the architecture (CacheService, MemoryService,
ByteBufferAllocator) are described through an interface. But it seems a lot
of implementation dependant methods are there: collectXXXX,....
Is it planned to revisit these definitions in the near future ? In the same
direction, the default CacheService implementation has a Timer whose goal
is to call an action on the MemoryService layer !!!



"Legacy code" often differs from its suggested alternative by actually
working and scaling.
 - Bjarne Stroustrup

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message