On Sep 5, 2013, at 8:39 PM, Yunkai Zhang <yunkai...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 在 2013年9月5日星期四，Leif Hedstrom 写道：
>
>>
>> On Sep 4, 2013, at 5:02 PM, zw...@apache.org <javascript:;> wrote:
>>
>> I'm not sure I like this, because it means it would be impossible to
>> implement TS-1882 ("ATS doesn't warn about unknown config items").
>>
>> What I would like is one of
>>
>> 1) Set the defaults to 0 consistently, as it was.
>
>
> I don't think so. I should point out again:
>
> 1) 0 is a *bad* default value for users. I much more care about user
> experience: so many users complain to me why the reclaim don't make effect
> after enable reclaimable free list.
What are you arguing about ? Who said anything about user experience?
What this commit does it that it produces a default records.config files that
don't have corresponding RecordsConfig.cc entries. That prevents proper
implementation of TS-1882. It's as simple as that.
If you think it's correct behavior that we have a default records.config that
doesn't have appropriate RecordsConfig.cc support, well, I guess we have
different opinions on what "user experience" is. I much rather make it possible
for users (with TS-1882 implemented) get errors when they have a typo in a
records.config name, than accommodating for an edge case that most people don't
experience…
I would prefer option 2) in my post, I don't know if it's possible. I find it
highly confusing to have reclaimable free list configurations in our default
records.config, when the default is to not build with reclaimable freelist.
Talk about poor user experience.
Now, how do we make reclaimable freelist enabled by default? I think we need to
do proper code reviews, and tests on performance by more than one organization.
So far, no one (that I know of?) has voiced any interest in this feature, but I
urge people who do to speak up so we can make this a priority.
> IMO, good user experience is the most priority than everything, what
> program should do is to free user's hand and mind.
Of course. The reclaimable freelist is still an "experimental" feature. The
rest of records.config / RecordsConfig.cc is not…
Ciao,
-- leif
