Re: xbean finder getURLs()

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

committed the fix,

it needed a workaround for surefire which doesn't respect getURLs semantic
with some config (the one of xbean for instance).

i added a property to deactivate it too if needed.

hope i didn't break anything

*Romain Manni-Bucau*
*Twitter: @rmannibucau *
*Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*
*LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
*Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*



2013/4/25 Kevan Miller 

>
> On Apr 25, 2013, at 9:25 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau 
> wrote:
>
> > tested a bit perfs using AppClassLoader only (so it can be a bit
> different in a JavaEE or OSGi envrt)
> >
> > single call: URLClassLoader => 654 vs getResources => 1130 (ms but the
> unit is not important)
> > 1000 calls: 5503 vs 612621
> >
> > i'll check our tests are still passing then commit the change if nobody
> shouts before
>
> Sounds good. Thanks Romain.
>
> --kevan
>
>

Re: xbean finder getURLs()

[Kevan Miller]

On Apr 25, 2013, at 9:25 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau  wrote:

> tested a bit perfs using AppClassLoader only (so it can be a bit different in 
> a JavaEE or OSGi envrt)
> 
> single call: URLClassLoader => 654 vs getResources => 1130 (ms but the unit 
> is not important)
> 1000 calls: 5503 vs 612621
> 
> i'll check our tests are still passing then commit the change if nobody 
> shouts before

Sounds good. Thanks Romain.

--kevan

Re: xbean finder getURLs()

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

tested a bit perfs using AppClassLoader only (so it can be a bit different
in a JavaEE or OSGi envrt)

single call: URLClassLoader => 654 vs getResources => 1130 (ms but the unit
is not important)
1000 calls: 5503 vs 612621

i'll check our tests are still passing then commit the change if nobody
shouts before



*Romain Manni-Bucau*
*Twitter: @rmannibucau *
*Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*
*LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
*Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*



2013/4/25 Kevan Miller 

>
> On Apr 17, 2013, at 3:22 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > in org.apache.xbean.finder.UrlSet#getUrls we rely on META-INF (or "") to
> find jars. There are cases where it doesn't work at all (a common case
> where i saw it is when you only have META-INF/MANIFEST.MF which is consider
> for a single entry and not META-INF then MANIFEST.MF - depends the build
> tool/zip format if i understood correctly)
> >
> > the question are:
> > 1) do we getresources("META-INF/MANIFEST.MF") too
> > 2) why not simply querying the classloader which is very very often an
> URLClassLoader -> if (yes) return Arrays.asList(classLoader.getURLs());
> else currentImpl;
> >
> > The 2 seems less correct but in practise i think it is more efficient -
> we can do both too (testing URLClassLoader and if not adding MANIFEST.MF
> listing)
> >
> > wdyt?
>
> Hi Romain,
> I'd be interested in some examples. What tools/jars don't contain a
> META-INF? But contain META-INF/MANIFEST.MF?
>
> Anyway, given that they (tools/jars) evidently exist, I guess 2) is ok. As
> you say, it may be faster. Concern will be about changing the behavior. But
> if we get sufficient testing, should be ok…
>
> --kevan

Re: xbean finder getURLs()

[Kevan Miller]

On Apr 17, 2013, at 3:22 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau  wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> in org.apache.xbean.finder.UrlSet#getUrls we rely on META-INF (or "") to find 
> jars. There are cases where it doesn't work at all (a common case where i saw 
> it is when you only have META-INF/MANIFEST.MF which is consider for a single 
> entry and not META-INF then MANIFEST.MF - depends the build tool/zip format 
> if i understood correctly)
> 
> the question are:
> 1) do we getresources("META-INF/MANIFEST.MF") too
> 2) why not simply querying the classloader which is very very often an 
> URLClassLoader -> if (yes) return Arrays.asList(classLoader.getURLs()); else 
> currentImpl;
> 
> The 2 seems less correct but in practise i think it is more efficient - we 
> can do both too (testing URLClassLoader and if not adding MANIFEST.MF listing)
> 
> wdyt?

Hi Romain,
I'd be interested in some examples. What tools/jars don't contain a META-INF? 
But contain META-INF/MANIFEST.MF?

Anyway, given that they (tools/jars) evidently exist, I guess 2) is ok. As you 
say, it may be faster. Concern will be about changing the behavior. But if we 
get sufficient testing, should be ok…

--kevan