2012/9/29 Raffaele P. Guidi <[email protected]>:
> OK, deal, at least for me ;-) I propose you rename the packages, produce a
> patch for this and the new serializer module (should be simple enough
> starting from an existing one) and, in the meanwhile, apply for ASF
> membership. Is IP clearance needed? I guess yes.
> After this we will come up with a formal vote regarding Noctarius (is this
> your real name?!) allowance in the project team.
+1 from me too.
IMHO ip clearance is not needed. We will just receive a patch from a
contributor (all the code has been done by him AFICS in the git repo).
If that's not the case ip clearance is needed.

At least as it's a huge patch we need a cla from him.
@Noctarius see http://www.apache.org/licenses/ and in section
"Contributor License Agreements" the link to cla from to send to
secretary@.
Once this is done attach your patch to a jira issue
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRECTMEMORY


>
> Good times are gonna come :-)
>
> Thanks,
>     R
> Il giorno 29/set/2012 17:58, "Olivier Lamy" <[email protected]> ha scritto:
>
>> 2012/9/29 Raffaele P. Guidi <[email protected]>:
>> > Well we already have a NIO ready interface allowing direct access to DMs
>> > managed bytebuffers but I think this is just half way to what could be
>> > achieved optimally blending serialization and memory allocation together.
>> >
>> > Lightning as a module is of course a good idea and it could easily evolve
>> > as a subproject (for the more experienced asf members: is it a feasible
>> > way?).
>> Nothing prevent to have
>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/directmemory/lightning/trunk
>> with a package like: o.a.d.lightning
>> That will be a subproject.
>> >
>> > Ciao,
>> >     R
>> > Il giorno 29/set/2012 17:44, "Noctarius" <[email protected]> ha scritto:
>> >
>> >> Hey guys,
>> >>
>> >> ok there's no lightning binary available since lightning wasn't
>> >> ready yet for releasing.
>> >>
>> >> For being the only developer it would be no problem to contribute
>> >> the sourcebase for DirectMemory but I'm not sure yet if it wouldn't
>> >> be better to seperate it to be available without using DirectMemory
>> >> itself. I started it as a serializer for cluster synchronization,
>> >> but it would be cool to contribute lightning as a subproject to
>> >> DirectMemory :-)
>> >>
>> >> About the second project I would love to see a public available
>> >> buffer API directly in DirectMemory so that project would be nearly
>> >> needless :-) The only difference I think is the allocation strategy
>> >> my implementation is using against the one DirectMemory has, but I'm
>> >> pretty sure the allocation is extensible ;-)
>> >>
>> >> Like I said, for both projects I'm the only dev so there would be no
>> >> IP problem. So if it's ok to you to not include lightning directly
>> >> in DM I would be glad to contribute to the Apache Foundation :-)
>> >>
>> >> Cheers Chris
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Am 29.09.2012 16:53, schrieb Raffaele P. Guidi:
>> >> > Ok so it's up to noctarius - your move! ;-) Regarding the new unsafe
>> >> > storage: it's an opt-in feature that can be set with the fluent API
>> (and
>> >> > soon through the conference file).
>> >> >
>> >> > Ciao,
>> >> >     R
>> >> > Il giorno 29/set/2012 16:45, "Olivier Lamy" <[email protected]> ha
>> >> scritto:
>> >> >
>> >> >> 2012/9/29 Raffaele P. Guidi <[email protected]>:
>> >> >>>>> At least for the moment he can provide a patch to be integrated
>> in DM
>> >> >> :-)
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Sure, but as lightning is not in any public mvn repo should its
>> code be
>> >> >>> re-published in our svn? Or what?
>> >> >> @Apache we don't care about binaries, only sources are important ! (a
>> >> >> bit theorical for sure but that's it :-) ).
>> >> >> So if Noctarius was the only guy who participate in lightning. He can
>> >> >> just provide a patch we could integrate as a new dm module (note: the
>> >> >> patch must not contains any more copyright and all sources must have
>> >> >> ASF licenses).
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "Copyright 2012 the original author or authors." must be removed.
>> >> >> And BTW package must be changed :-) (com.github is not acceptable
>> @asf
>> >> >> :-) )(@Noctarius are you working for github ? :-) )
>> >> >>
>> >> >> And having him as a committer will be only a matter of voting (we
>> have
>> >> >> a great chair who take cares of administrative stuff :P )
>> >> >>
>> >> >> If some others have participated in the project, we must pass tru an
>> >> >> ip clearance mechanism
>> >> >> (http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html) and all
>> >> >> contributors to lightning must provide a cla. (It it's the case I can
>> >> >> help)
>> >> >>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>>> perso I'd like we avoid hard dependency on Unsafe as maybe some
>> use
>> >> >>> other jdks :-)
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Well, I believe Unsafe is supported by Sun JDK, OpenJDK, IBM JDK and
>> >> >>> JRockit - and I believe that it is more than enough. Also keep in
>> mind
>> >> >> that
>> >> >>> we already have an alternative Unsafe based memory storage - and
>> >> although
>> >> >>> it's not thoroughly tested for performance it dramaticaly simplifies
>> >> >> code,
>> >> >>> I have great expectations about it.
>> >> >> Me too :-). Yup definitely more simple and faster !
>> >> >> But we must provide a switch off configuration mechanism if some
>> users
>> >> >> don't want to use that (because Unsafe is just "Unsafe" :-) )
>> >> >> And sorry I didn't have a look yet at your changes with using Unsafe.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Cheers,
>> >> >>>     R
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 4:03 PM, Olivier Lamy <[email protected]>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>> 2012/9/29 Raffaele P. Guidi <[email protected]>:
>> >> >>>>> What do you think about:
>> >> >>>>> 1) implementing a lightning serialization module
>> >> >>>>> 2) creating a serializer that directly works on a directmemory
>> >> >> provider
>> >> >>>>> ByteBuffer or (maybe better) Unsafe based Pointer?
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Sounds good (perso I'd like we avoid hard dependency on Unsafe as
>> >> >>>> maybe some use other jdks :-) )
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> Now I see lightning is apache licensed and this is fine but I
>> don't
>> >> >> think
>> >> >>>>> it is published in any public maven repo, am I right? We could
>> find a
>> >> >> way
>> >> >>>>> to deal with this; options vary from publishing lightning to the
>> free
>> >> >>>>> sonatype repo,  joining the ASF (which is great anyhow!) and
>> >> >> republishing
>> >> >>>>> lightning code in DirectMemory becoming a commiter (which has to
>> >> >> undergo
>> >> >>>> a
>> >> >>>>> PMC vote).
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> At least for the moment he can provide a patch to be integrated in
>> DM
>> >> >> :-)
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> I'd like to hear your and the team feelings on this.
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> Thanks,
>> >> >>>>>     Raffaele
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 3:27 PM, Noctarius <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>> Hey Raffaele,
>> >> >>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>> that's quite similar to what I did at work. We're developing
>> Flash
>> >> >>>>>> online games and using a customized AMF serialization. To support
>> >> >>>>>> async writing of the clients event results I added serialization
>> of
>> >> >>>>>> the components / entities to the players zone calculation and
>> stored
>> >> >>>>>> the pre-serialized bytestream directly to the off-heap (using
>> >> >>>>>> direct-ring-cache implementation). When the client requests the
>> >> >>>>>> results (using long-polling) I just write the pre-serialized
>> data to
>> >> >>>>>> the right position to deserialize it by standard ways on Flash
>> side.
>> >> >>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>> So yeah an seriliaztion to off-heap algorithm would be fine. You
>> can
>> >> >>>>>> avoid using byte arrays and minimalize GC.
>> >> >>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>> Cheers
>> >> >>>>>> Chris
>> >> >>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>> Am 29.09.2012 15:02, schrieb Raffaele P. Guidi:
>> >> >>>>>>> Nice to hear back from you! Yes, I was thinking about creating a
>> >> >> new
>> >> >>>>>> memory
>> >> >>>>>>> storage implementation using Unsafe (and I did it, recently) and
>> >> >>>> also, as
>> >> >>>>>>> DirectMemory relies heavily on serialization (and supports many
>> of
>> >> >>>> them,
>> >> >>>>>>> protostuff, protobuf, msgpack and of course standard
>> >> >> serialization),
>> >> >>>>>> about
>> >> >>>>>>> creating a simple embedded serializer leveraging the same
>> >> >> techniques
>> >> >>>> you
>> >> >>>>>>> used (Unsafe and bytecode generation).
>> >> >>>>>>> The idea with embedding is avoiding to serialize in a byte array
>> >> >> and
>> >> >>>> then
>> >> >>>>>>> moving the byte array to off-heap memory (via Unsafe or
>> >> >> ByteBuffers),
>> >> >>>> and
>> >> >>>>>>> serializing directly into a "managed" off-heap buffer, thus
>> further
>> >> >>>>>>> optimizing heap utilization (less GC).
>> >> >>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>> What do you think about it? Does it make any sense to you?
>> >> >>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>> Ciao,
>> >> >>>>>>>     R
>> >> >>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>> On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Noctarius <[email protected]>
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>> Hey guys,
>> >> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>> Raffaele found out about a project of mine (Lightning) a few
>> weeks
>> >> >>>>>>>> ago. Lightning is a heavy Unsafe and Bytecode generation using
>> >> >>>>>>>> Serializer implementation. He told me that he was interested in
>> >> >>>>>>>> adding something similar to DirectMemory and I would be glad to
>> >> >> help
>> >> >>>>>>>> out in this.
>> >> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>> Another project I started a few days ago, since it was needed
>> for
>> >> >>>>>>>> work is DirectRingCache. The name not really meets to actual
>> >> >>>>>>>> implementation since it's not yet a ring buffer using cache. I
>> >> >> used
>> >> >>>>>>>> this for a pre-serialization simple bytestream cache with
>> >> >>>>>>>> self-growing buffers. It could be nice to have DirectMemory
>> having
>> >> >>>>>>>> raw "buffers" to write to or to read from.
>> >> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>> Here are the links from the projects:
>> >> >>>>>>>> https://github.com/noctarius/Lightning
>> >> >>>>>>>> https://github.com/noctarius/direct-ring-cache
>> >> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>> It would be nice to help out since I really like the idea of
>> >> >>>>>>>> DirectMemory and since direct-ring-cache is some kind of
>> >> >> reinventing
>> >> >>>>>>>> the wheel.
>> >> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>> Cheers
>> >> >>>>>>>> Noctarius (Chris)
>> >> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> --
>> >> >>>> Olivier Lamy
>> >> >>>> Talend: http://coders.talend.com
>> >> >>>> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> Olivier Lamy
>> >> >> Talend: http://coders.talend.com
>> >> >> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Olivier Lamy
>> Talend: http://coders.talend.com
>> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>>



-- 
Olivier Lamy
Talend: http://coders.talend.com
http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy

Reply via email to