Am 24.10.2012 23:09, schrieb Raffaele P. Guidi: > Yay for the segfault! :-D
Ok first impression committed to the svn trunk. Tests are running fine (at least for my local try) and I made some of the unittests parameterized. > Il giorno 24/ott/2012 23:04, "Christoph Engelbert" <[email protected]> > ha scritto: > >> Am 24.10.2012 21:00, schrieb Olivier Lamy: >>> 2012/10/24 Raffaele P. Guidi <[email protected]>: >>>> Really, really good. Well, if all tests pass why not starting pushing >> the >>>> changes to svn? :-) >>> +1 :-) >> Ok back to topic I have added the JUnit extension and a lot of tests >> are failing for the Unsafe implementation and I get a JVM SegFault >> too :) I think there's something more to do. I'll commit it to the >> SVN as far as the tests passing. >> >>>> Ciao, >>>> R >>>> Il giorno 24/ott/2012 11:35, "Christoph Engelbert" < >> [email protected]> >>>> ha scritto: >>>> >>>>> Hey, >>>>> >>>>> I added the codebase to support the existing UnsafeMemoryManager and >>>>> usage of the pointers. >>>>> >>>>> >> https://github.com/noctarius/directmemory/commit/dd666b673596c71bccf3d999da4da8c967370538 >>>>> Chris >>>>> >>>>> Am 24.10.2012 09:21, schrieb Raffaele P. Guidi: >>>>>> just put together a test using the UnsafeStore (there's already one >>>>>> available) and see how it works >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 6:51 AM, Christoph Engelbert >>>>>> <[email protected]>wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Morning Raffaele, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> at the moment the store is not used but it should be easy to use the >>>>>>> pointers instead of a long for the memory address. I just need to >>>>>>> implement this. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I also thought about some kind of a virtual memory file for swapping >>>>>>> purposes if the object should be just be removed from the cache but >>>>>>> wasn't used for a longer time (like the normal swap data). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cheers Chris >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Am 24.10.2012 00:41, schrieb Raffaele P. Guidi: >>>>>>>> Looks good - how does it play with the unsafe based store? >>>>>>>> Il giorno 23/ott/2012 21:21, "Christoph Engelbert" < >>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>> ha scritto: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hey guys, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> some time before I mentioned that it would be nice to have a real >>>>>>>>> buffer interface to against. The actual implementation only had >>>>>>>>> ByteBuffer when using non Unsafe MemoryAllocators. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I started to add a clean interface, derived from the nettys >>>>>>>>> ChannelBuffer, to be used as the main accesspoint to every memory >>>>>>>>> access no matter what the underlying access layer looks like. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> At the moment I'm working against the GIT fork on GitHub and I'll >>>>>>>>> like to see your opinion and ideas about the MemoryBuffer interface >>>>>>>>> and the general idea. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The two important commits are: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >> https://github.com/noctarius/directmemory/commit/5b3cf11af0e71f5961b1bfcf69b10f3cb9388ff6 >> https://github.com/noctarius/directmemory/commit/05082a6aa2cac91bb2ab6e104837bb1431dae90d >>>>>>>>> Looking forward to your replies especially because I'm not yet sure >>>>>>>>> how the general way of new features is :-) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Cheers Chris >>>>>>>>> >>> >>
