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

[bstansberry@jboss.com]

"manik.surtani at 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#4115215

Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4115215