JBoss development,
A new message was posted in the thread "ClassPool Refactoring":
http://community.jboss.org/message/519032#519032
Author : Kabir Khan
Profile : http://community.jboss.org/people/kabir.khan@jboss.com
Message:
--------------------------------------------------------------
I have refactored and committed the changes against https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBREFLECT-90 (I think JBREFLECT is the project the classpool stuff belongs under?).
While I am here, I noticed that the point 3) in http://community.jboss.org/message/281717#281717 has not been done. I want to change ClassPoolRepostitory.callback to a list, which would mean changing the API from:
public void setClassPoolRepositoryCallback(ClassPoolRepositoryCallback callback)
public ClassPoolRepositoryCallback getClassPoolRepositoryCallback()
to:
public void addClassPoolRepositoryCallback(ClassPoolRepositoryCallback callback)
public void removeClassPoolRepositoryCallback(ClassPoolRepositoryCallback callback)
public Collection<ClassPoolRepositoryCallback> getClassPoolRepositoryCallbacks()
While this is a change in API, I seriously doubt anybody is using this yet, apart from the unreleased AOP stuff Flavia is working on, so I'll make this change unless Ales objects by Monday afternoon :-)
--------------------------------------------------------------
To reply to this message visit the message page: http://community.jboss.org/message/519032#519032
JBoss development,
A new message was posted in the thread "Short lived Objects, exposure through Profile Service":
http://community.jboss.org/message/519031#519031
Author : Ramesh Reddy
Profile : http://community.jboss.org/people/rareddy
Message:
--------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, I see the issue with @ManagementProperty being loaded each time management view is loaded. I switched it to @ManagementOperation instead on the "getRequests" call. Now "requests" collection is only loaded on demand.
Are you suggesting "Request" annotation to be changed to "@CompositeValue" instead of "@ManagedObject"?
Thanks.
Ramesh..
--------------------------------------------------------------
To reply to this message visit the message page: http://community.jboss.org/message/519031#519031
JBoss development,
A new message was posted in the thread "Problem decrypting the encryptedKey at server side":
http://community.jboss.org/message/518986#518986
Author : Jim Ma
Profile : http://community.jboss.org/people/jim.ma
Message:
--------------------------------------------------------------
Do you use wireshark or tcpmon to monitor the soap message ? Is there any difference between this two clients ?
--------------------------------------------------------------
To reply to this message visit the message page: http://community.jboss.org/message/518986#518986
JBoss development,
A new message was posted in the thread "StructureModificationChecker and Synch with VFS3":
http://community.jboss.org/message/518978#518978
Author : Emanuel Muckenhuber
Profile : http://community.jboss.org/people/emuckenhuber
Message:
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ok, then we'll take care of mounting the originals somewhere else to access the original files. The only thing i can think of which has to be added is a additional constructor to AbstractVFSDeployment(String name, VirtualFile root) so that we can make sure redeployment works correctly.
Coming back to the original topic, i guess we would just need to have one single method:
boolean hasStructureBeenModified(String deploymentName, VirtualFile root)
The deploymentName to identify the deployment context and VirtualFile for the original copy of the deployment root. That should hopefully be enough?
--------------------------------------------------------------
To reply to this message visit the message page: http://community.jboss.org/message/518978#518978
JBoss development,
A new message was posted in the thread "ClassPool Refactoring":
http://community.jboss.org/message/518941#518941
Author : Kabir Khan
Profile : http://community.jboss.org/people/kabir.khan@jboss.com
Message:
--------------------------------------------------------------
I also see that we are using synchronized quite a lot in heavily hit places like BaseClassPoolDomain.getCachedOrCreate(), I'll try to refactor to use R/W locks
--------------------------------------------------------------
To reply to this message visit the message page: http://community.jboss.org/message/518941#518941
JBoss development,
A new message was posted in the thread "ClassPool Refactoring":
http://community.jboss.org/message/518932#518932
Author : Kabir Khan
Profile : http://community.jboss.org/people/kabir.khan@jboss.com
Message:
--------------------------------------------------------------
> alesj wrote:
>
>
> > Or caching at the domain level might make more sense
> We should definitely do some caching,
> otherwise we'll end up like MC's CL who suffered heavily by not caching at the begining.
>
> Can you have a look at this?
> And perhaps we can still push it into M2?
OK
--------------------------------------------------------------
To reply to this message visit the message page: http://community.jboss.org/message/518932#518932
JBoss development,
A new message was posted in the thread "ClassPool Refactoring":
http://community.jboss.org/message/518929#518929
Author : Ales Justin
Profile : http://community.jboss.org/people/alesj
Message:
--------------------------------------------------------------
> Or caching at the domain level might make more sense
We should definitely do some caching,
otherwise we'll end up like MC's CL who suffered heavily by not caching at the begining.
Can you have a look at this?
And perhaps we can still push it into M2?
--------------------------------------------------------------
To reply to this message visit the message page: http://community.jboss.org/message/518929#518929
JBoss development,
A new message was posted in the thread "ClassPool Refactoring":
http://community.jboss.org/message/518928#518928
Author : Kabir Khan
Profile : http://community.jboss.org/people/kabir.khan@jboss.com
Message:
--------------------------------------------------------------
> mailto:kabir.khan@jboss.com wrote:
> Maybe these lookups should be cached in the initiating pool, with some invalidation if the domain (or its parent domain) has pools added/removed?
Or caching at the domain level might make more sense
--------------------------------------------------------------
To reply to this message visit the message page: http://community.jboss.org/message/518928#518928