river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Firmstone <j...@zeus.net.au>
Subject Re: Request for testing help
Date Thu, 23 Sep 2010 11:07:31 GMT
Patricia Shanahan wrote:
> YES, PLEASE! Code reviews are a good thing in any case, and this is my 
> first open source, Apache, or River coding effort, so there may be 
> style issues.

Actually, all the code you've written so far has been readable and 
understandable.  Hope you enjoy your vacation.



> My big picture objective is to improve the scalability of TaskManager, 
> as a response to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RIVER-344.
> It was doing a lot of O(n) operations, mainly due to the use of an 
> ArrayList to represent essentially a FIFO. Those O(n) operations are 
> doubly bad news for scalability because they are done under 
> synchronization. I've reduced many of them to O(log n) by replacing 
> the ArrayList with a TreeSet and PriorityBlockingQueue, both in order 
> of arrival, the same order as the original ArrayList.
> I may implement finer scale optimizations later, such as replacing 
> synchronization with atomic operations. However, in my experience it 
> is important to get the data structures and algorithms right first.
> Unfortunately, as far as I can tell, even with Jonathan's heroic 
> test-enabling efforts, I don't think we have a good TaskManager 
> scalability test, or a test of the concurrent behavior of its clients.
> Patricia
> On 9/22/2010 7:16 AM, Tom Hobbs wrote:
>> I'm happy to do some code reviews.  I can't run any tests though, I 
>> don't
>> have any access to any Windows machines.
>> Let me know if this would be useful, and I'll check those revisions out.
>> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 10:33 PM, Patricia Shanahan<pats@acm.org>  
>> wrote:
>>> I'm testing my new TaskManager the , but I have some anomalies. It 
>>> would
>>> help me to get some more testing of
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/river/jtsk/skunk/patsTaskManagerdone

>>> in other WindowsXP environments.
>>> Both the head revision and revision  998737 need to be tested. Revision
>>> 998737 is the one I plan to merge into the trunk. It changes the 
>>> interface
>>> between TaskManager and its callers, with minimal changes to 
>>> TaskManager.
>>> It is important that it be tested widely, because it affects a lot of
>>> critical classes, and would be difficult to back out.
>>> The head revision drops in a revised TaskManager. It should be easy 
>>> to back
>>> out if necessary.
>>> Patricia

View raw message