On Thu, 20 Feb 2020 10:37:34 GMT, littlefreaky <github.com+1434627+littlefre...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>>> I don't see any stray commits, so it looks like your branch is based off of >>> master correctly. >>> >>> One thing I would ask you to change is that the title of this PR should >>> exactly match the title of the JBS bug. So can you change it to: >>> >>> ``` >>> 8176499: Dependence on java.util.Timer freezes screen when OS time resets >>> backwards >>> ``` >> >> apologies, all done > > I have a question about the scheduling of the task: > The old code used Timer.schedule(TimerTask,long,long) which schedules the > task for repeated fixed-delay execution. > The new code uses ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.scheduleAtFixedRate​(Runnable, > long, long, TimeUnit) which schedules the task for repeated fixed-rate > execution. > > Now I think that scheduling at fixed rate would be the correct way as we want > to reach 60 pulses per second. But my question is: Can this lead to problems > if the work done per pulse takes longer than 16ms? The scheduleAtFixedRate > does queue subsequent executions if the previous task takes too long. > Couldn't this lead to an task queue overflow if the system is overloaded? Do > we need to add protection for that scenario? I may be wrong, but looking at the source code for both java.util.Timer.java and ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java, they both appear to grow their respective queues if needs be. So i don't think the proposed solution is any worse in that respect. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx/pull/117
