jmeter-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Philippe Mouawad <philippe.moua...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Update to minimum Java 7
Date Mon, 01 Jun 2015 13:39:23 GMT
As per dev mailing list thread which could have been reused for this:
-
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/jmeter-dev/201411.mbox/%3CCAOGo0Vb1FfpUiPCc0fLQhFn2oyHvTss2R90NTGM7GQsh2m_-+Q@mail.gmail.com%3E

+1 for me.
Among additional reasons to what has been exposed:

1/ There is a new method in Java 7 that is interesting for performances (
http://download.java.net/jdk7/archive/b123/docs/api/java/net/InetSocketAddress.html#getHostString%28%29)
instead of getHostName() which makes a reverse lookup, see
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hc-httpclient-users/201302.mbox/%3C1360057832.23610.6.camel@ubuntu%3E.
See:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54449
And I noticed sometimes this method could slowdown JMeter startup in
certain network conditions, until the reverse lookup timeouts
2/ Better String implementation (We need to take care) =>
http://java-performance.info/changes-to-string-java-1-7-0_06/
3/ We have a copy of Doug Lea's class for Random that is in JDK7
4/ We can expect our dependencies to drop JDK6 support in near future
5/ Better NIO support in recent JDK versions which we could use in some
features discussed in RoadMap thread

Regards
@philmdot


On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 3:17 PM, Andrey Pokhilko <apc4@ya.ru> wrote:

> +100500
>
> Andrey Pokhilko
>
> On 06/01/2015 04:14 PM, sebb wrote:
> > I think we should require a minimum of Java 7 for the next JMeter
> release.
> > (It currently requires 1.6)
> >
> > This is because:
> > - Java 7 supports proper certificate generation for the HTTP recorder.
> > It will probably allow some code simplification.
> > - the Javadoc vulnerability CVE-2013-1571 has been fixed since Java 7
> > update 25 (June 2013). We could drop the patch.
> > - any others?
> >
> > Of course Java 7 is just about EOL, but I've not yet seen any
> > compelling reasons to require a minimum of Java 8. If there are such
> > reasons (other than Java 7 is EOL) please raise them here.
> >
> > A very minor consideration is that Javadoc 7 seems to have been fixed
> > to generate lower-case HTML tags - e.g. <table> rather than <TABLE>.
I
> > assume that will remain the case. So there will be a once-off SVN
> > difference when older API docs are replaced with new ones.
>
>

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