kamnani commented on pull request #352:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomcat/pull/352#issuecomment-697550277
> I tried it, with some changes. Will see the feedback about an actual
performance benefit. I measured the cost of building the filter, not too big
overall so there's likely
kamnani commented on pull request #352:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomcat/pull/352#issuecomment-696834567
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and
kamnani commented on pull request #352:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomcat/pull/352#issuecomment-696930075
> There's no cache here: the AbstractArchiveResourceSet already has a
"JarFile archive" field, so it adds a new JarContents field with the same data
and both get created and
kamnani commented on pull request #352:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomcat/pull/352#issuecomment-696834567
> I made the change to use the Context instead of the Host, no issue there.
> However, I'm not ok with the proposed changes as is. The problem for me is
that I don't understand
kamnani commented on pull request #352:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomcat/pull/352#issuecomment-694947975
@rmaucher Thanks for the comment.
We tested this optimization on an application with 3500+ jars which
performed 60,000+ class loads. This sliced off 180+ seconds from the
kamnani commented on pull request #352:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomcat/pull/352#issuecomment-694940080
@martin-g Thanks for your valuable feedback.
I have added the test cases and marked the conversations as resolved after
the latest commits. Do we have anything else on this PR?
kamnani commented on pull request #352:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tomcat/pull/352#issuecomment-689825942
@martin-g Thanks for your time on this : )
I have marked all of the conversations as resolved after the latest commits.
Do we have any more feedback on this PR?
