Hi, all,
Thanks for Jeff and Raffaele's quick feedback. I can't agree with you two anymore. We should make the documentation be better to let users can easily understand the best practice of CacheService. Thanks, Min On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 9:43 PM, Jeff MAURY <[email protected]> wrote: > Done > > Jeff > > > On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 11:31 AM, Raffaele P. Guidi < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > +1 as always (but more than usual) documentation needs improvement > > > > Anyhow I passed the patch yesterday eveninv > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Jeff MAURY <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Le 2 oct. 2012 16:19, "Min Zhou" <[email protected]> a écrit : > >> > > >> > Hi, Jeff. > >> > > >> > Thanks for your quick reply. I written the test code according to the > >> > guide at http://directmemory.apache.org/simple-usage.html . > >> > There is no refer that tell me I should close the CacheService at the > >> > end. IMHO, creating a instance of CacheService following a builder > >> > pattern, which is not different from the construction of other normal > >> > Object instances. There no open() method after construction, users > >> > can't realize that they should close something if there is no > >> > document on that. The timer is internally started by directmemory, > >> > make it a daemon thread should be better. > >> > How do you think about that? Do you think that my patch will make > >> > things getting better? > >> Min, > >> > >> Yes, I think your patch adds a protection against incorrect use but does > >> not prevent against leaked resources (at least until full gc occurs) > >> We should open a jira regarding the documentation > >> > >> Jeff > >> > > >> > > >> > Thanks, > >> > Min > >> > > >> > > >> > On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Jeff MAURY <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > > Hello, > >> > > > >> > > there is also another workaround: close the CacheService at the end > of > >> your > >> > > test, this is the recommended way of correct use. > >> > > I may perhaps find time to work on it this night. > >> > > > >> > > Jeff > >> > > > >> > > On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Min Zhou <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > Hi, all, > >> > > > > >> > > > Is there anybody can take a look at DIRECTMEMORY-101? This is > >> really a > >> > > bug. > >> > > > > >> > > > Thanks, > >> > > > Min > >> > > > -- > >> > > > My research interests are distributed systems, parallel computing > >> and > >> > > > bytecode based virtual machine. > >> > > > > >> > > > My profile: > >> > > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/coderplay > >> > > > My blog: > >> > > > http://coderplay.javaeye.com > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > -- > >> > > Jeff MAURY > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > "Legacy code" often differs from its suggested alternative by > actually > >> > > working and scaling. > >> > > - Bjarne Stroustrup > >> > > > >> > > http://www.jeffmaury.com > >> > > http://riadiscuss.jeffmaury.com > >> > > http://www.twitter.com/jeffmaury > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > My research interests are distributed systems, parallel computing and > >> > bytecode based virtual machine. > >> > > >> > My profile: > >> > http://www.linkedin.com/in/coderplay > >> > My blog: > >> > http://coderplay.javaeye.com > >> > > > > > > > -- > Jeff MAURY > > > "Legacy code" often differs from its suggested alternative by actually > working and scaling. > - Bjarne Stroustrup > > http://www.jeffmaury.com > http://riadiscuss.jeffmaury.com > http://www.twitter.com/jeffmaury > -- My research interests are distributed systems, parallel computing and bytecode based virtual machine. My profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/coderplay My blog: http://coderplay.javaeye.com
