Mailing-List: contact dev-help@directmemory.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@directmemory.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of tsaloranta@gmail.com designates
 209.85.215.178 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <50929720.9050008@apache.org>
References: <508EDF64.2050602@apache.org>
	<CAPoyBqQ8FMJ+qwzRaDsTYMZ51ETf_iPg4+79hsi14sne1dpyKw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAqLGLOH5UMeMnRoeG41VGaL-ri--RqPi6fG-4bmXFNAQNJ4Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGrxA27njCumQz9bugTQP=jou8fMJWRnC7bjSehi2CVxgGc5bA@mail.gmail.com>
	<509246A9.4010207@apache.org>
	<CAGrxA26QipBbTE+hRGKMbQryc=BLhtSPfvhOukpAMG3-FnWnrQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<50929720.9050008@apache.org>
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2012 08:45:39 -0700
Message-ID: 
 <CAGrxA24Wg+pDVcw-r+iYE8s46pbnPcFJn+0AsDGN1GWJpOWHmA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: KryoSerializer
From: Tatu Saloranta <tsaloranta@gmail.com>
To: dev@directmemory.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 8:37 AM, Christoph Engelbert
<noctarius@apache.org> wrote:
> Am 01.11.2012 16:35, schrieb Tatu Saloranta:
>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 2:53 AM, Christoph Engelbert
>> <noctarius@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Am 30.10.2012 18:01, schrieb Tatu Saloranta:
>>>> You may want to see how serializer/deserializer in
>>>>
>>>> https://github.com/eishay/jvm-serializers
>>>>
>>>> is done -- Martin wrote it (or at least modified & has maintained it),
>>>> so it should be along best practices.
>>>>
>>>> -+ Tatu +-
>>> This is only best practice for non concurrent access. The unittests
>>> are executed one by one so the implementation using one byte array
>>> is not a problem but this cannot be threadsafe.
>>>
>>> This applies to this one as well. Never use this implementation in
>>> concurrent environments :-)
>>> https://github.com/eishay/jvm-serializers/blob/kannan/tpc/src/serializers/Kryo.java
>> Correct. What I meant was it was right way to do it for the use case
>> in question. Which granted requires one to understand the use case...
>> I forgot that this particular test does not do multi-threaded
>> processing like others do.
>>
>> It actually is one of the things for jvm-serializers to consider;
>> efficient reuse techniques vary a lot between codecs.
>>
>> -+ Tatu +-
>
> I guess there's still the problem about the kryo instance itself. On
> googlecode it is marked that the kryo instance itself is not
> threadsafe. Anyone has some more informations about that? Tatu? :-)

No, I have only tried to use it without success once or twice, outside
of jvm-serializers.
My weapon of choice if Smile+Jakcson. :-D

But Kryo author (Nate something?) should know -- I can try to dig
contact info, point him to this mailing list.

-+ Tatu +-