[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-16783?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15582764#comment-15582764
]
stack commented on HBASE-16783:
-------------------------------
Dumb question. Why a ByteBufferPoolManager introduced? We seem to move the guts
of ByteBufferListOutputStream to a new class ByteBufferPoolManager but
ByteBufferPoolManager is not used anywhere else (unless I am misreading). Why
not just leave it as is?
Is intent saving allocation of a a few bytes building headers? We have numbers
that going via synchronization to a pool is better than a small allocation?
Patch looking good otherwise.
> Use ByteBufferPool for the header and message during Rpc response
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-16783
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-16783
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: ramkrishna.s.vasudevan
> Assignee: ramkrishna.s.vasudevan
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: HBASE-16783.patch, HBASE-16783_1.patch,
> HBASE-16783_2.patch, HBASE-16783_3.patch
>
>
> With ByteBufferPool in place we could avoid the byte[] creation in
> RpcServer#createHeaderAndMessageBytes and try using the Buffer from the pool
> rather than creating byte[] every time.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
