geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: PR Merge?
Date Tue, 23 Aug 2016 15:17:48 GMT
2016-08-23 17:15 GMT+02:00 Clebert Suconic <clebert.suconic@gmail.com>:

> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 10:55 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau
> <rmannibucau@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > 2016-08-23 16:51 GMT+02:00 Clebert Suconic <clebert.suconic@gmail.com>:
> >>
> >> TBH: I don't expect the implementation to ever change on a given
> >> classLoader.
> >>
> >
> > So you accept to not work for tomcat, tomee, geronimo, wildfly (ok they
> will
> > not use that jar), karaf etc...? Point is a serious amount of users rely
> on
> > redeployment so we have to support cleaning up somehow.
>
> As Far as I know redeployment means a classLoader change. If you cache
> per classLoader a redeployment will remove the old classLoader and add
> a new one.
>
> No applicaition server that I know will change loaded classes once the
> classLoader is up.  Redeployments will remove the old classloader and
> create a new one.
>
>
"Redeployments will remove the old classloader"

this is were we "split" I suspect. This is not true since the key is a
classloader and classloader is the root of most of everything so GC is
rarely enough


>
> There are serious implications to the application server if that
> doesn't work this way. So I doubt any application server would behave
> differently.
>
>
> I may be wrong, but this is what I have seen over the years.
>

Think we agree on what we want but disagree on what actually happens there.

What about starting with the registry I proposed and enhance/fix it on
demand? Sounds like a compromise

Mime
View raw message