Yasumasa, I'll sponsor the push.
-Dmitry On 2016-08-09 04:01, David Holmes wrote: > On 8/08/2016 11:17 PM, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote: >> Hi David, >> >>> It is a better fix in my opinion but still changes the behaviour of >>> jhsdb - or is that not an issue? Is jhsdb new with 9? >> >> Can I list you as a reviewer? >> This change is agreed by Dmitry. So I think we can move forward it. > > Yes to both. :) > > Thanks, > David > >> >> Thanks, >> >> Yasumasa >> >> >> On 2016/08/05 20:38, David Holmes wrote: >>> On 5/08/2016 8:55 PM, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote: >>>> Hi David, >>>> >>>> Thank you for your comment. >>>> >>>> For not to break current behavior, I think we should not change >>>> c'tor of >>>> JStack. >>>> I uploaded new webrev: >>>> >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ysuenaga/JDK-8163185/webrev.01/ >>>> >>>> David, is it okay? >>> >>> It is a better fix in my opinion but still changes the behaviour of >>> jhsdb - or is that not an issue? Is jhsdb new with 9? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> David >>> >>>> Dmitry, could you review again? >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Yasumasa >>>> >>>> >>>> On 2016/08/05 14:49, David Holmes wrote: >>>>> On 5/08/2016 12:24 AM, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote: >>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>> >>>>>> This review request is related to [1]. >>>>>> >>>>>> "jhsdb jstack" should work as normal mode without being added --mixed >>>>>> option. >>>>>> However, this command always works as mixed mode. >>>>> >>>>> So it seems to me the JStack class has a very poorly designed API and >>>>> command-line interface. It appears that jstack wants to default to >>>>> mixedMode and concurrentLocks, but provides no means to disable those >>>>> defaults. Given there is no way to turn those settings off from the >>>>> commad-line then the default should be that they are off! Then you >>>>> would not need current proposed change. >>>>> >>>>> That said the proposed fix effectively disables those defaults, which >>>>> seems to me to be a change in behaviour. >>>>> >>>>> I can't see a way to fix this without breaking existing behaviour >>>>> somewhere. In which case I would change the way the JStack instance is >>>>> initialized by default ie: >>>>> >>>>> public JStack() { >>>>> this(true, true); >>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> becomes: >>>>> >>>>> public JStack() { >>>>> this(false, false); >>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> Or it may be better to handle this on the jhsdb side and change this: >>>>> >>>>> JStack.main(newArgs.toArray(new String[newArgs.size()])); >>>>> to >>>>> >>>>> JStack js = new jstack(false,false); >>>>> js.runWithArgs(newArgs.toArray(new String[newArgs.size()])); >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> David >>>>> >>>>>> So I uploaded webrev for this issue. Could you review it? >>>>>> >>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ysuenaga/JDK-8163185/webrev.00/ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm jdk 9 reviewer (ysuenaga), but I cannot access JPRT. >>>>>> So I need a sponsor. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> >>>>>> Yasumasa >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> [1] >>>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2016-August/020087.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- Dmitry Samersoff Oracle Java development team, Saint Petersburg, Russia * I would love to change the world, but they won't give me the sources.
