On 12/12/11 10:26 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote: > Hi all guys, > time ago we spoke about replacing the synchronized blocks inside > pools, maybe using different strategies like Java5 Read/Write lock (I > remind you Pool2 requires Java5) and I just started playing with > PoolUtils with the SynchronizedObjectPool[1] inner class... > Can we discuss about introducing such modifications inside pool > implementations?
I would say go for it in PoolUtils. Assuming we keep these pools, we should update them as we have GOP, GKOP. Regarding the pool you mention specifically, it is a little funny in that it is designed to be fully synchronized. Make sure that whatever implementation changes you propose maintain the contract. Phil > Many thanks in advance, all the best! > -Simo > > [1] https://gist.github.com/1468252 > > http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ > http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/ > http://twitter.com/simonetripodi > http://www.99soft.org/ > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
