Hi, I will.....but there is a reason for me finding this issue :-) I'll update when tested
/hw to., 15.12.2016 kl. 14.31 +0100, skrev Romain Manni-Bucau: > Before digging can you check with a higher value? ~50ms the jvm is > not > precise enough depending the os and api. Try around 300ms or 1s > maybe. > > Le 15 déc. 2016 14:21, "hwaastad" <[email protected]> a écrit : > > > > > Hi Romain, > > I'll take my chance asking you since you were the one to solve > > earlier JCS > > issue :-) > > (and I discovered this issue using tomee :-) ) > > > > https://github.com/hwaastad/JcsTest.git (develop) > > > > when using AccessedExpiryPolicy this will fail using beta-2 while > > using > > beta-1 it's ok: > > > > cachingProvider = Caching.getCachingProvider(); > > cacheManager = > > cachingProvider.getCacheManager(cachingProvider.getDefaultURI(), > > Thread.currentThread().getContextClassLoader(), > > cachingProvider.getDefaultProperties()); > > cacheManager.createCache( > > cacheName, > > new MutableConfiguration<Integer, Integer>() > > .setStoreByValue(false) > > .setStatisticsEnabled(true) > > .setManagementEnabled(true) > > .setTypes(Integer.class, Integer.class) > > .setExpiryPolicyFactory(AccessedExpiryPolicy.factor > > yOf(new > > Duration(TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS, 10)))); > > > > @Test > > public void testTwo() throws Exception { > > cache = cacheManager.getCache(cacheName, Integer.class, > > Integer.class); > > cache.put(name, value); > > cache.get(name); > > Thread.sleep(12); > > assertFalse(cache.containsKey(name)); > > cache.put(name, value); > > assertTrue(cache.containsKey(name)); > > } > > > > > > /hw > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > View this message in context: http://tomee-openejb.979440. > > n4.nabble.com/JCS-beta-2-bug-tp4680745.html > > Sent from the TomEE Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >
