Re: RFR 8145635 : Add TCP_QUICKACK socket option

Hi Vyom, A few suggestions: PlainDatagramSocketImpl.java:  - line 95/96:  I think you can use just forEach, the order version is not necessary.     The code will be a bit more readable if the .filter and .forEach are on a new line and don't wrap.     You can also remove the extra "(" and ")

RE: RFR(S): 8155590: Dubious collection management in sun.net.www.http.KeepAliveCache

Hi Vyom, thanks for your feedback. I'm not so sure about dropping "synchronized". In the new remove method of ClientVector we are iterating ourself. If this is not done under synchronization, there is risk to run into a ConcurrentModificationException. But under the assumption that all access

Re: RFR(S): 8155590: Dubious collection management in sun.net.www.http.KeepAliveCache

Hi Christoph, Thanks for doing this, i think you don't need to synchronize the "remove(HttpClient h)".  This remove is get called from synchronize "remove (HttpClient h, Object obj)" and the underline data structure is which is java.util.Vector(ClientVector extends java.util.Stack) is also th

RFR(S): 8155590: Dubious collection management in sun.net.www.http.KeepAliveCache

Hi, Here is a proposal for a fix for bug 8155590. I already made this fix a while ago in our JDK clone and I'd like to contribute this. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8155590 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~clanger/webrevs/8155590.0/ Please review. Thanks Christoph