I don't think so. The core of the ITC problem [2] was that we were allocating a new buffer for each message. We're more careful when doing BRAF reads to use fixed-size buffers.
[2] http://www.mail-archive.com/user@cassandra.apache.org/msg13357.html On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Chris Burroughs <chris.burrou...@gmail.com> wrote: > CASSANDRA-2654 worked around a painful jdk bug [1]. In the course of > trying to audit DirectByteBuffer use I've been trying to wrap my head > around the interaction of BufferedRandomAccessFile and FileChannel. I > admit that I'm as confused by nio as ever, but FileChannelImpl does > appear to use Util.releaseTemporaryDirectBuffer. > > Do we have to work around [1] in BRAF just as we now do for > IncomingTcpConnection? > > > [1] http://bugs.sun.com/view_bug.do?bug_id=6210541 > -- Jonathan Ellis Project Chair, Apache Cassandra co-founder of DataStax, the source for professional Cassandra support http://www.datastax.com
