[jboss-user] [JBoss Tools (users)] - Re: WTP2.0.1, JBossAS-Tools-1.0.0.beta4 not publishing corre
"max.andersen(a)jboss.com" wrote : Ok - we'll look into reproducing fixing
this.
|
| With respect to the bugids did you report those about buffer size not being good
enough etc. ?
|
| Would be good to have the bugids ?
|
| And yes, the adapter needs to do exploded deployment to trigger this error.
Short:
I have never lodged bugids about either buffer size or threading issues, I never cared for
them enough, more concerned with creating bugids for things that actually affect me rather
than a thorny code review.
Long:
I would guess a windows developer mistakenly thought that using a large buffer 64kb will
mean that file writes will handle 64Kb atomically, since most files being published are
< 64Kb and this skips over most problems of the runtime being a part built file,
<head_shake>NO, NO, NO, NO, NO!</head_shake>. I can only guess this is the
illogical reason for this large size. I use the term "windows developer" in the
derogatory sense, I hope I offend, ROFL :)
The threading issue I commented in another comment to a different bugid, knowing the
maintainer for that file may read it. For all I know all server publish actions are
serialized and since server drivers are the only things expected to use PublishUtil class
there maybe no real problem here, even if I think I see one. It would also be very rare
occurrence needing concurrent usage of PublishUtil to trigger, which presumes the user has
2 active runtimes at once, all these factors somewhat reduce its importance to
"can't be bothered to write a bug entry for it" status.
On the subject of size; I care more that the buffer is shared by all users (is
'static') than about the fact its 64kb, but if you start instancing that class
then making it 1Kb should get you within 97% performance, and 4Kb within 99% performance
of 64Kb (if you ever through there was a performance issue in the first place) or just
allocate a byte[] on demand. Those white papers indicate you get diminishing returns for
performance.
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4095216#...
Reply to the post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...