mina-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Trustin Lee" <trus...@gmail.com>
Subject To keep direct buffer support or not
Date Fri, 08 Dec 2006 05:58:52 GMT
Hi,

In the recent discussion (
http://www.nabble.com/Is-MINA-ByteBuffer-pool-of-dubious-value--tf2652301.html#a7401135),
we agreed on removing acquire() / release() methods and pooling stuff.  I
think it's a great idea, but what do we do now with direct buffers?  They
take longer to allocate / deallocate, and that was why we introduced pooling
feature.  Are we just abandoning direct buffers and let users manage the
buffer in their own way?

A possible alternative could be providing a separate direct buffer manager
for only those who uses direct buffers, but considering the current
performance results, we won't need to provide this feature for a long time.
And eventually, it might not be a duty of MINA but a duty of JVM
implementation to manage allocated direct buffers effectively.  We might be
trying to resolve the problem that we are not supposed to resolve.  What do
you think?

Trustin
-- 
what we call human nature is actually human habit
--
http://gleamynode.net/
--
PGP key fingerprints:
* E167 E6AF E73A CBCE EE41  4A29 544D DE48 FE95 4E7E
* B693 628E 6047 4F8F CFA4  455E 1C62 A7DC 0255 ECA6

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