directmemory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff MAURY <jeffma...@jeffmaury.com>
Subject Re: Is there anybody can take a look at DIRECTMEMORY-101
Date Wed, 03 Oct 2012 13:43:29 GMT
Done

Jeff


On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 11:31 AM, Raffaele P. Guidi <
raffaele.p.guidi@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1 as always (but more than usual) documentation needs improvement
>
> Anyhow I passed the patch yesterday eveninv
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Jeff MAURY <jeffmaury@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Le 2 oct. 2012 16:19, "Min Zhou" <coderplay@gmail.com> a écrit :
>> >
>> > Hi, Jeff.
>> >
>> > Thanks for your quick reply. I written the test code according to the
>> >  guide at http://directmemory.apache.org/simple-usage.html .
>> > There is no refer that tell me I should close the CacheService at the
>> >  end.  IMHO, creating a instance of CacheService following a builder
>> >  pattern, which is not different from the construction of other normal
>> >  Object instances. There no open() method after construction, users
>> >  can't realize that they should close something if there is no
>> > document on that. The timer is internally started by directmemory,
>> > make it  a daemon thread should be better.
>> > How do you think about that? Do you think that my patch will make
>> > things getting better?
>> Min,
>>
>> Yes, I think your patch adds a protection against incorrect use but does
>> not prevent against leaked resources (at least until full gc occurs)
>> We should open a jira regarding the documentation
>>
>> Jeff
>> >
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Min
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Jeff MAURY <jeffmaury@jeffmaury.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hello,
>> > >
>> > > there is also another workaround: close the CacheService at the end of
>> your
>> > > test, this is the recommended way of correct use.
>> > > I may perhaps find time to work on it this night.
>> > >
>> > > Jeff
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Min Zhou <coderplay@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Hi, all,
>> > > >
>> > > > Is there anybody can take a look at DIRECTMEMORY-101? This is
>> really a
>> > > bug.
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks,
>> > > > Min
>> > > > --
>> > > > My research interests are distributed systems, parallel computing
>> and
>> > > > bytecode based virtual machine.
>> > > >
>> > > > My profile:
>> > > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/coderplay
>> > > > My blog:
>> > > > http://coderplay.javaeye.com
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Jeff MAURY
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > "Legacy code" often differs from its suggested alternative by actually
>> > > working and scaling.
>> > >  - Bjarne Stroustrup
>> > >
>> > > http://www.jeffmaury.com
>> > > http://riadiscuss.jeffmaury.com
>> > > http://www.twitter.com/jeffmaury
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > My research interests are distributed systems, parallel computing and
>> > bytecode based virtual machine.
>> >
>> > My profile:
>> > http://www.linkedin.com/in/coderplay
>> > My blog:
>> > http://coderplay.javaeye.com
>>
>
>


-- 
Jeff MAURY


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

http://www.jeffmaury.com
http://riadiscuss.jeffmaury.com
http://www.twitter.com/jeffmaury

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