The two cases i seen the abort() helped, since it closes the socket without
synchronize and the socket close will unblock the read.
But you need to be careful not to call any other blocking method first (i
remeber rollback, Statement close and even isOpen (if i recall correctly) have
been
On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 00:06, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 11:43 AM Mark Thomas wrote:
>
> > On 03/09/2020 15:37, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 10:17 AM Mark Thomas wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 03/09/2020 14:06, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > >>> Mark,
> > >>>
> > >>> The
On 9/3/20 3:02 PM, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
The issues I have seen are not a/b "deadlocks", they are "just" endless locks -
the close is waiting for a read to finish (since both synchronize on the connection). If the
asumption is a pool timer can in the background cancel a read - it can't, at
On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 11:43 AM Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 03/09/2020 15:37, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 10:17 AM Mark Thomas wrote:
> >
> >> On 03/09/2020 14:06, Gary Gregory wrote:
> >>> Mark,
> >>>
> >>> The vote email must contain SHA256 or 512 hashes for the file bin and
>
The issues I have seen are not a/b "deadlocks", they are "just" endless locks -
the close is waiting for a read to finish (since both synchronize on the
connection). If the asumption is a pool timer can in the background cancel a
read - it can't, at least on Oracle thin or jtds.
The cause can
Id just go with a shade+relocation as several geronimo or owb libs since
javax will stay mainstream for years.
Avoid yet another package change and 2 branches to maintain.
Le jeu. 3 sept. 2020 à 18:33, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO a
écrit :
> Hi,
>
> Jakarta Mail is under vote at the minute and should
Le jeu. 3 sept. 2020 à 17:01, Gary Gregory a écrit :
>
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 10:47 AM Gilles Sadowski
> wrote:
>
> > Le jeu. 3 sept. 2020 à 14:49, Gary Gregory a
> > écrit :
> > >
> > > Over on GH [1], Matt mentions retry APIs like retry4j which is a concept
> > we
> > > could reuse in
Hi,
Jakarta Mail is under vote at the minute and should go out hopefully in a
few days.
https://www.eclipse.org/lists/jakarta.ee-spec/msg00788.html
Some work has been done on the Apache Geronimo side of things recently. Not
sure about the status though.
Le jeu. 3 sept. 2020 à 17:52, Xeno Amess
5.0.0 means this :
https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/servlet-api/releases/tag/5.0.0-RELEASE
And I believe that is the first release who introduced new namespaces for
jakarta.
And as you've already noticed, there even be no jakarta-
mail 2.0 release to use now.
I don't think it worthy to maintain a
On 03/09/2020 15:37, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 10:17 AM Mark Thomas wrote:
>
>> On 03/09/2020 14:06, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>> Mark,
>>>
>>> The vote email must contain SHA256 or 512 hashes for the file bin and gz
>>> files in
On Thursday, 3 September 2020 15:58:53 BST Xeno Amess wrote:
> > Is there a version of commons-email which uses
> >
> > the new jakarta-mail API rather than the old
> > javax.mail API?
>
> of course not.
> They just released 5.0.0, which use the new API, at just 4 days ago...
I was not
On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 10:47 AM Gilles Sadowski
wrote:
> Le jeu. 3 sept. 2020 à 14:49, Gary Gregory a
> écrit :
> >
> > Over on GH [1], Matt mentions retry APIs like retry4j which is a concept
> we
> > could reuse in Commons components like IO, Lang, Pool (and by extension
> > DBCP).
> >
> >
> Is there a version of commons-email which uses
> the new jakarta-mail API rather than the old
> javax.mail API?
of course not.
They just released 5.0.0, which use the new API, at just 4 days ago...
> If not is one planned?
No ideas.
Is there a version of commons-email which uses
the new jakarta-mail API rather than the old
javax.mail API?
If not is one planned?
Le jeu. 3 sept. 2020 à 14:49, Gary Gregory a écrit :
>
> Over on GH [1], Matt mentions retry APIs like retry4j which is a concept we
> could reuse in Commons components like IO, Lang, Pool (and by extension
> DBCP).
>
> While this might initially feel like a fit for Lang, I wonder what the
>
On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 10:17 AM Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 03/09/2020 14:06, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > Mark,
> >
> > The vote email must contain SHA256 or 512 hashes for the file bin and gz
> > files in https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/daemon/
> >
> > Per
On 03/09/2020 14:06, Gary Gregory wrote:
> Mark,
>
> The vote email must contain SHA256 or 512 hashes for the file bin and gz
> files in https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/daemon/
>
> Per https://commons.apache.org/releases/prepare.html
>
> (There is no need to hash the files twice
Mark,
The vote email must contain SHA256 or 512 hashes for the file bin and gz
files in https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/daemon/
Per https://commons.apache.org/releases/prepare.html
(There is no need to hash the files twice on
On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 at 13:07, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>
> Le jeu. 3 sept. 2020 à 13:55, sebb a écrit :
> >
> > On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 at 20:54, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 2, 2020, 15:50 Xeno Amess wrote:
> > >
> > > > Why so hurry?
> > > >
> > >
> > > I need to use new APIs now.
Over on GH [1], Matt mentions retry APIs like retry4j which is a concept we
could reuse in Commons components like IO, Lang, Pool (and by extension
DBCP).
While this might initially feel like a fit for Lang, I wonder what the
community thinks.
Gary
[1]
Le jeu. 3 sept. 2020 à 13:55, sebb a écrit :
>
> On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 at 20:54, Gary Gregory wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 2, 2020, 15:50 Xeno Amess wrote:
> >
> > > Why so hurry?
> > >
> >
> > I need to use new APIs now. Releases happen all the time, more releases
> > more often is better than big
On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 at 20:54, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 2, 2020, 15:50 Xeno Amess wrote:
>
> > Why so hurry?
> >
>
> I need to use new APIs now. Releases happen all the time, more releases
> more often is better than big bang releases IMO, IOW RERO (Release Early,
> Release Often).
>
>
Thanks very much for getting the release out :-)
On Tue, 1 Sep 2020 at 16:52, Alex Herbert wrote:
>
> The Apache Commons Team is pleased to announce the availability of
> version 1.15 of "Apache Commons Codec".
>
> The Apache Commons Codec package contains simple encoders and
> decoders for
On 31/08/2020 01:05, Phil Steitz wrote:
> If others agree it is a good idea for dbcp, I can do it. I can see the
> argument that its better to stay with close() even for abandoned and I
> have not been able to get the deadlock to happen, so I would like to
> wait a bit and allow others to
24 matches
Mail list logo
