Hi, >> Everything no problem *if* the Store interface would have a method like >> <code>int size()</code>. But it doesn't provide this in the moment. And we >> all no how people react, when we change a work interface. But I can change >> the implementation of <code>Enumeration keys()</code> and determine so the >> size elements in the store. That would be possible. >> >> 1/10 I like. Half is a little bit <german>krass</german>. Think about that >> chain picture Stefano drawed. > >Yes, 1/10 might be more effective in most cases. But remember there are >typically 3 stores (I don't know why or whether this varies), so a krass >half might be a not so krass 1/6 really! Remember it typically takes 2-3 >seconds for each iteration if gc is called - so how long would it take >to empty (or reduce by say 99%) if that is necessary? >
<german>Nein</german>, there is only one Store in the next release. But the StoreJanitier should nevertheless be able to handle one or more Stores. > >If you loose half of a store, will it be the least used half? If so it >is probably a lot less used that the most used half - don't you think? >So the effect on performance of loosing it might be only 10 percent or >much less? > >Maybe the percent reduction on each iteration should be <dare I say it>a >settable parameter</dare I say it>? That is maybe a good idea. Gerhard --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
