Hi,

I'm just wondering if lightning uses Unsafe only for serializers (i.e.
for reading/writing fields of objects) or also for the input/output
streams used to read/write to/from off-heap memory? Using
DirectBuffers "as is" for accessing off-heap memory is actually rather
slow.

Let me share some experiences  with you:
I have implemented a similar feature for Kryo. It is not in the trunk
yet, as it is being reviewed by Nate, the author of Kryo.
One of the things that I noticed is that using Unsafe only for
serializers is nice, but does not provide much improvement.
At the same time, using Unsafe for input/output streams and
reading/writing directly from/into off-heap memory provides
significant performance benefits.
My patch for Kryo implements both features using Unsafe. If you want
to see more details about the implementation and findings, please have
a look at:
http://code.google.com/p/kryo/issues/detail?id=75

I hope it will land in Kryo trunk soon. Once it is there, I think it
could be interesting to add a Kryo-based serialization to
DirectMemory. What do you think?
But independent of this, feel free to take any ideas or even the
implementation from the patch. The off-heap memory streams
implementation is rather self-contained and could be reused with other
frameworks besides Kryo.

Regards,
  Roman

On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 8:46 PM, Noctarius <[email protected]> wrote:
> Actually all dependencies should be AL2 or BSD licensed :-)
>
> Am 29.09.2012 20:42, schrieb Raffaele P. Guidi:
>>>> Hehe well that really sounds like a nice bunch of people.
>>
>> Indeed they are (I'm a newbie as well and try to do my best)
>>
>>>> If lightning will be a sub-part (sub-project) of DM, do I
>>>> need to write
>> an project purposal?
>>
>> Nope, not needed for a sub-project
>>
>>>> Do I need to make any changes to the pom.xml like adding a
>> special parent pom or anything like that?
>>
>> Not for the serializer - just have to take a look at project
>> dependencies - or, better, at their licenses - are they
>> compatible with the ASL 2.0? i.e. a GPL'd library is not a good
>> fit and should be replaced with an apache licensed (or BSD, or
>> MIT...) one if possible. For the integration module is a
>> separate story - you should start off copying one of the other
>> serializers and reusing the same pom and directory structure.
>>
>> Pleased to meet you, Chris :)
>>
>> Ciao, R
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 8:24 PM, Noctarius <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hehe well that really sounds like a nice bunch of people.
>>>
>>> Ok to be true I couldn't wait until tomorrow and started
>>> already reading the links. From what I was reading: If
>>> lightning will be a sub-part (sub-project) of DM, do I need
>>> to write an project purposal?
>>>
>>> Do I need to make any changes to the pom.xml like adding a
>>> special parent pom or anything like that?
>>>
>>> In general: there are a lot things to know :-)
>>>
>>> Am 29.09.2012 19:59, schrieb Raffaele P. Guidi:
>>>> Negative part of ASF membership? You get together with a
>>>> lot of geeky, talented people with a fixation for software
>>>> and open source. Oh wait but this is actually nice! :-D Il
>>>> giorno 29/set/2012 19:05, "Olivier Lamy" <[email protected]>
>>>> ha
>>> scritto:
>>>>
>>>>> 2012/9/29 Noctarius <[email protected]>:
>>>>>> Thanks Olivier for carify, I'll take a look in it
>>>>>> tomorrow but there's just one question left (for now
>>>>>> ;)): What is that vote for becoming a committer? What
>>>>>> if the vote will be negative?
>>>>> The vote is on private list (pmc list for privacy reasons
>>>>> and possible negative stuff being on public lists)
>>>>>> Until now I just used Apache stuff, was never
>>>>>> interested in being part of it so I guess it can be
>>>>>> negative for any reason, can't it?
>>>>> I don't see why it could be negative but suspens ....
>>>>> :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 29.09.2012 18:56, schrieb Olivier Lamy:
>>>>>>> 2012/9/29 Noctarius <[email protected]>:
>>>>>>>> Nope my real name is Christoph Engelbert, but
>>>>>>>> Noctarius is the all time nick :)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Renaming the package should be no problem, is it
>>>>>>>> "org.apache.directmemory.lightning" or what would
>>>>>>>> it be?
>>>>>>> fine for me
>>>>>>>> Then there needs to be a change in the license
>>>>>>>> header as Olivier mentioned, that means just remove
>>>>>>>> the first sentence or is there anything more to do
>>>>>>>> (maybe it's easiest thing to just copy the header
>>>>>>>> from DM file ;))?
>>>>>>> yup use same header as DM
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The CLA is just a form to clarify that the source
>>>>>>>> can be contributed to the Apache Foundation?
>>>>>>> yup correct.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The final step will be attaching the patch in form
>>>>>>>> of a huge diff file?
>>>>>>> yes
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And what is the way to apply for a membership?
>>>>>>>> Never thought about how to do that.
>>>>>>> Read here
>>>>>>> http://apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html and
>>>>>>> here http://apache.org/foundation/getinvolved.html .
>>>>>>> And feel free to ask any questions :-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Chris
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Am 29.09.2012 18:23, schrieb Raffaele P. Guidi:
>>>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 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