On 20/05/2009, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 20/05/2009, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: > > I believe I have addressed all the currently known issues standing > > between the pool code and a 1.5 release. > > > > I know Phil is doing / will be doing various performance tests. If > > anyone else has any issues now would be a good time to mention it. > > > Just spotted: > > GenericKeyedObjectPool.ObjectTimestampPair.value > GenericKeyedObjectPool.ObjectTimestampPair.tstamp > > could be made private & final.
=> could be made final. > This will make the class immutable and thread-safe. > > If GKOP.ObjectQueue is shared between threads, then activeCount needs > to be synchronized. Just changing the increment/decrement methods to > include the field in the synch. block should work, as the read access > is in GenericKeyedObjectPool.getNumActive() which synch.s on the same > lock. > > > > Mark > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
