Matthew Toseland wrote: > On Tuesday 03 February 2009 11:36:01 [email protected] wrote: >> Author: nextgens >> Date: 2009-02-03 11:36:00 +0000 (Tue, 03 Feb 2009) >> New Revision: 25484 >> >> Modified: >> trunk/freenet/src/freenet/node/NodePinger.java >> Log: >> Improve NodePinger: >> >> -take care of synchronization >> -requeue before we do anything so that we are closer to a 200ms period >> -logging optimizations >> >> @@ -24,35 +37,34 @@ >> run(); >> } >> >> - final Node node; >> - >> public void run() { >> - //freenet.support.OSThread.RealOSThread.logPID(this); >> - try { >> - recalculateMean(node.peers.connectedPeers); >> - } finally { >> - node.ps.queueTimedJob(this, 200); >> - } >> + // Requeue *before* so that it's accurate in any case >> + node.ps.queueTimedJob(this, 200); > > Is this really a good idea? If there is heavy load, you could end up with > hundreds of these jobs running in parallel? >
In that case we are screwed anyway; Introduce a "fast-fail" using a volatile boolean if you think it's worth it. _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [email protected] http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
