unsubscribe
________________________________
From: openjfx-dev <[email protected]> on behalf of
[email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: 20 February 2020 12:01
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: openjfx-dev Digest, Vol 99, Issue 45
Send openjfx-dev mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.openjdk.java.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fopenjfx-dev&data=02%7C01%7C%7C5440cf11fae940a7bb4b08d7b5fce917%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637177970150537908&sdata=jy6O7D6WkXCxc%2BfKn22GERa%2FBjlxAQn4qanxEb7BMxE%3D&reserved=0
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of openjfx-dev digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: RFR: 8176499: Dependence on java.util.Timer freezes
screen when OS time resets backwards (littlefreaky)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2020 11:43:53 GMT
From: littlefreaky <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: RFR: 8176499: Dependence on java.util.Timer freezes
screen when OS time resets backwards
Message-ID:
<GzoF0rFOunXPA1ffv2gJV5P5M6LG8bl5xlJ4zbxUYfg=.c86783de-a39f-48eb-ba0a-f1becb8b8...@github.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
On Thu, 20 Feb 2020 11:22:28 GMT, Dell Green
<[email protected]> wrote:
>> 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.
Ok. Thanks for the clarification.
-------------
PR:
https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgit.openjdk.java.net%2Fjfx%2Fpull%2F117&data=02%7C01%7C%7C5440cf11fae940a7bb4b08d7b5fce917%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637177970150537908&sdata=mbzRbZBaGhfINqZ4xbNVgaHnPbFy%2BW19Xns2C6%2F1tJY%3D&reserved=0
End of openjfx-dev Digest, Vol 99, Issue 45
*******************************************
