On 03/05/2018 12:49 PM, Phil Race wrote:
I originally thought you were referring to the Hashtable in the test ?
No. I meant Hashtable created in line 151.
That really doesn't matter.
If you are referring to the use of hashtable in the JDK class then I
think it is safer to leave it as is. Hashtable is provably safe here, and
for HashMap you'd need to ensure that concurrent read and write
are safe. The HashMap is created only once but may be updated
more than once, even if it is not likely in real world use (multiple
locales in use).
Can you point to place where this Hashmap is updated other then where it
is initialized?
Advertising
The performance cost here is negligible, probably not measurable in
real world code where there is no contention for the lock
This requires evidence. You need to know the load characteristic to
state that. If collisions are proven to be rare the optimistic locking
is preferable. But still, I don't see any grounds to have any collisions
since these are read-only data. Synchronization may degrade performance
a lot and may be a source for deadlocks so it's always better to avoid it.
--Semyon
-phil.
On 03/05/2018 11:21 AM, Semyon Sadetsky wrote:
On 03/05/2018 10:41 AM, Krishna Addepalli wrote:
Hi Semyon,
Thank you for the review. I don’t see any reason why HashMap can’t
be used here. But could you clarify what you meant by
“synchronization is surplus here”?
Sure. Hashtable is synchronized. And since the locale bundle is
created once now and then is only read there is no need to have extra
thread access synchronization.
Besides, whether we use HashMap /Hashtable, the fix for this
particular bug still remains.
As for changing (if that is necessary), I think we should address it
in a separate bug?
It is not unrelated completely since you are fixing a performance
issue. I suggest to fix it for one since it is easy.
--Semyon
Thanks,
Krishna
*From:*Semyon Sadetsky
*Sent:* Monday, March 5, 2018 10:39 PM
*To:* Krishna Addepalli <krishna.addepa...@oracle.com>; Philip Race
<philip.r...@oracle.com>
*Cc:* swing-dev@openjdk.java.net
*Subject:* Re: <Swing Dev>
[11][JDK-8197785]javax.accessibility.AccessibilityBundle will reload
the ResourceBundle for every call to toDisplayString
On 03/05/2018 09:00 AM, Semyon Sadetsky wrote:
Hi Krishna,
Is there any reason to use Hashmap. It seems the synchronization
is surplus here and its better to use HashMap.
I meant Hashtable. Sorry.
--Semyon
--Semyon
On 03/05/2018 05:39 AM, Krishna Addepalli wrote:
Hi Phil
Thank you for the review.
I have checked the accessibility package, and found that
contains is used with a Vector of AccessibleState objects in
the file AccessibleStateset.
However in AccessibilityBundle, the table is used to store a
set of values associated with a particular locale, and going
by the context, I find little reason that using contains is
intentional here.
And regarding the testcase, the thought of making it
headless crossed my mind while writing it, but I was not
sure if just creating a Button is allowed in headless mode.
Fortunately, I modified the testcase enough that, no swing
widgets need to be created, and we can safely run the test
in headless mode.
Here is the new webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kaddepalli/8197785/webrev01/
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Ekaddepalli/8197785/webrev01/>
Thanks,
Krishna
*From:*Philip Race
*Sent:* Saturday, March 3, 2018 9:44 PM
*To:* Krishna Addepalli <krishna.addepa...@oracle.com>
<mailto:krishna.addepa...@oracle.com>
*Cc:* swing-dev@openjdk.java.net
<mailto:swing-dev@openjdk.java.net>
*Subject:* Re: <Swing Dev>
[11][JDK-8197785]javax.accessibility.AccessibilityBundle
will reload the ResourceBundle for every call to toDisplayString
The fix is straightforward and I've seen this bug pattern
before.
In fact there may even have been a sweep for uses of
contains() to make sure it was as intended,
but if so it wasn't thorough enough.
But I'm wondering why the test extends Button and not JButton ?
I'm then further wondering if it could then be made headless
.. ie no need to create or display a Frame ?
-phil.
On 3/3/18, 6:30 AM, Krishna Addepalli wrote:
Hi All,
Please review a simple fix for JDK-8197785:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8197785
Webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kaddepalli/8197785/webrev00/
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Ekaddepalli/8197785/webrev00/>
As the bug description suggests,
AccessibleBundle.loadResourceBundle has the line
“table.contains” which causes it to reload the resource
bundle for each call.
Changing it to “table.containsKey” fixes the problem.
Thanks,
Krishna
