[jboss-dev-forums] [Design of JBossCache] - Re: Implicit marshalled values - a better way of handling re

"manik.surtani(a)jboss.com" wrote : | Or is there something clever in your MarshalledValue class that just passes the byte[] payload in writeExternal()? Here's what it does (I take no credit or blame; long predates me ;) ) | public void writeExternal(ObjectOutput out) throws IOException | { | int length = serializedForm != null ? serializedForm.length : 0; | out.writeInt(length); | if( length > 0 ) | { | out.write(serializedForm); // this is a byte[] created in the c'tor | } | out.writeInt(hashCode); | } The class is in the AS server module, org.jboss.invocation.MarshalledValue. It was originally written for use in remote invocations, and thus doesn't lazy-serialize. When we started using it for caching, that IMHO was a mistake; we should have written a version that has the behavior discussed on this thread. anonymous wrote : Or any other JDK objects - Dates, etc. Just have to be careful to exclude anything that can wrap a non-JDK type. Also can't use instanceof in type checking. Re: "releaseObjectReferences(fqn)" as the method name, sounds good. The "flush" name was just me being lazy in my post. :) +1 as well to having this be the default behavior. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4115215#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...