Hi all,

regarding APIs I'm happy with suggested additions & improvements.
And also the new buffer backend looks nice, I just didn't have time to have
a deeper look at the code but it feels great.
I wonder if this could be used in an OSGi environment or such dependencies
from local environment will make OSGi users less happy.
I'll try to have a second look later this week but it looks quite good,
thanks Christoph!

Regards,
Tommaso


2013/7/13 Christoph Engelbert <[email protected]>

> Am 12.07.2013 23:23, schrieb Raffaele P. Guidi:
> > Love it, great job, and expecially the idea of making it usable on its
> own.
> > This is more DirectMemory than DirectMemory ;)
>
> Thanks Raffaele
>
>  I started it back than as the an external cache for preserialized
> gameupdates (for gameclients) waiting until they're catched using
> the next polling cycle.
>
> Chris
>
> >
> > Ciao,
> >      R
> > Il giorno 12/lug/2013 20:55, "Christoph Engelbert" <[email protected]
> >
> > ha scritto:
> >
> >> Hey guys
> >>
> >> I finally managed to merge everything together :-)
> >>
> >> As stated a few weeks before I made a partitioned buffer system for
> >> good performance and less contention.
> >> It had different selection strategies like TLA (Thread Local
> >> Allocation), a simple RoundRobin or (on Linux and Windows) CLA
> >> (Processor Core Local Allocation), whereas the last is done using OS
> >> calls and JNA.
> >>
> >> It features ByteBuffers for Heap and Offheap as well as Unsafe. It
> >> has growing buffers (if slice is full a new one is selected) and can
> >> handle data bigger than Integer.MAX_VALUE (it uses full long
> >> position pointers).
> >>
> >> It is located in directmemory-buffer submodule since it was it's own
> >> project and it is fully usable even without having to use
> >> DirectMemory (I would suggest to give users the chance to use it on
> >> their own).
> >>
> >> As stated before it introduces a new dependency and especially a
> >> platform depending one. At least it is a optional dependency and CLA
> >> is deactivated if JNA is not available on the classpath.
> >>
> >> I although added 3 properties to configure the default strategy of
> >> creating the PartitionBufferPools:
> >> directmemory.buffer.pooling.disabled: true deactivates pooling and
> >> uses lazy creation and immediate destroying on release
> >> directmemory.buffer.unsafe.enabled: true activates the usage of
> >> sun.misc.Unsafe raw memory access (a check if unsafe is available is
> >> applied too)
> >> directmemory.buffer.offheap.enabled: true enabled DirectByteBuffer
> >> usage for for the non-unsafe-pools
> >>
> >> I merged it into my local fork of DirectMemory on github [1] but had
> >> to adjust the API of DirectMemory on some places. I introduced a
> >> MemoryManagerFactory which handles creation of the different
> >> MemoryManagers (as the old ones - partly renamed -
> >> UnsafeMemoryManager and AllocatorMemoryManager) and the new
> >> PartitionBufferMemoryManager.
> >> The Pointer-API is now able to use PartitionBuffers as well as the
> >> old way using byte[].
> >>
> >> I'm not yet finished, working on making all unittests pass again but
> >> I would appreciate some opinions, discussion on the new API changes.
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >> Chris
> >>
> >> [1] https://github.com/noctarius/directmemory/tree/buffer
> >>
>
>

Reply via email to