Hi, I've noticed the same when I refactor the commands marshalling.
I thought about creating a MarshallUtil.writeObjectWithExternalizer(T obj, Externalizer<T> ext) to handle this cases but it was outside the scope of that JIRA. In the end, most of the externalizers are stateless and it can be a Singleton and the allocation can be removed. +1 to create a JIRA to improve this cases. Pedro On 04/25/2016 01:36 PM, Radim Vansa wrote: > Hi, > > I've noticed that sometimes we marshall objects just using > output.writeObject() even though we know the target type - one example > for all is CommandInvocationId. That's somewhat suboptimal, as we know > that there won't be any CommandInvocationIdEx, so we could spare the > externalizer lookup and few bytes for object identifier. > > Is there any better way than > > new CommandInvocationId.Externalizer().writeObject(output, > commandInvocationId)? > > Should we use this ^? I guess that object allocation will be eliminated > here easily. > > Radim > _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
