> I disagree about time limiting MS. It may not be useful in many cases, > true. But I have a scenario in which machines are used to perform all > sorts of tasks and the are windows in which I'm allowed to do 'heavy > operations'. > > It's true I can just choose not to merge large segments, but I thought > that instead of guessing (even if it'd be an educated guess) which > segments I should pick for different time windows, I'll limit the time > the MS runs. That in addition to not picking large segments for short > time periods. > > There are many different scenarios out there Earwin. Some look bizarre > I admit :). Yup, that's the right word for what I am feeling. But, allright, you can have an Executor that interrupts its threads after a timeout. If we properly handle Thread.interrupted() within merging code, this will work, as well as all kinds of manual interruptions and whatnot.
> The entity which executes a single merge, today, is IW. Do you think > we need a different entity? For what purpose? We might create a new thing, we might use IW, doesn't matter. I outlined the separation of concerns I'd like to see. Whoever implements each part is a separate decision. -- Kirill Zakharenko/Кирилл Захаренко ([email protected]) Phone: +7 (495) 683-567-4 ICQ: 104465785 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
