7;t think it actually matters that much, the
> overall performance should still be similar, and it has the
> advantage of not needed an extra configuration value.
> >>
> >> Stuart
> >>
> >> - Original Message -
> >
e of not needed an extra
> configuration value.
> >>
> >> Stuart
> >>
> >> - Original Message -
> >>> From: "Scott Marlow"
> >>> To: "Steve Ebersole" , "Stuart Douglas" <
> sdoug.
On 12/16/2015 09:07 AM, Scott Marlow wrote:
> Any arguments against merging the
> https://github.com/scottmarlow/hibernate-orm/commits/pooledOptimizer_5.x
> change to master + 5.x?
>
> I will create a jira for this change.
>
> Any suggestions for how to specify in persistence.xml, that the
> Pool
the advantage of not needed an extra configuration value.
>>
>> Stuart
>>
>> - Original Message -
>>> From: "Scott Marlow"
>>> To: "Steve Ebersole" , "Stuart Douglas"
>>> , hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org
>&g
le" , "Stuart Douglas"
>> , hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org
>> Sent: Wednesday, 16 December, 2015 10:15:49 AM
>> Subject: Re: [hibernate-dev] Pooled Optimiser Improvements
>>
>> https://github.com/scottmarlow/hibernate-orm/commits/pooledOptimizer_5.x
>
ll be similar,
and it has the advantage of not needed an extra configuration value.
Stuart
- Original Message -
> From: "Scott Marlow"
> To: "Steve Ebersole" , "Stuart Douglas"
> , hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org
> Sent: Wednesday, 16 December,
https://github.com/scottmarlow/hibernate-orm/commits/pooledOptimizer_5.x
is looking more correct now, if others want to look at that.
On 12/15/2015 07:58 PM, Scott Marlow wrote:
>
>
> On 12/15/2015 05:58 PM, Scott Marlow wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 12/15/2015 05:40 PM, Scott Marlow wrote:
>>> I changed th
On 12/15/2015 05:58 PM, Scott Marlow wrote:
>
>
> On 12/15/2015 05:40 PM, Scott Marlow wrote:
>> I changed the new test methods a bit. [2] seems to be passed the tests
>> but I am not understanding how PooledThreadLocalLoOptimizer should
>> coordinate with the AccessCallback to allocate the next
On 12/15/2015 05:40 PM, Scott Marlow wrote:
> I changed the new test methods a bit. [2] seems to be passed the tests
> but I am not understanding how PooledThreadLocalLoOptimizer should
> coordinate with the AccessCallback to allocate the next chunk of
> sequence numbers.
>
> We seem to be able
I changed the new test methods a bit. [2] seems to be passed the tests
but I am not understanding how PooledThreadLocalLoOptimizer should
coordinate with the AccessCallback to allocate the next chunk of
sequence numbers.
We seem to be able to call AccessCallback.getNextValue() to get the next
Those tests tend to assert the increments. We seem to agree that this
ThreadLocal one can skip gaps of values. I'd look there first.
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 11:34 AM Scott Marlow wrote:
> I'm trying to move the optimizer to PooledThreadLocalLoOptimizer [1].
> We are currently failing some new
I'm trying to move the optimizer to PooledThreadLocalLoOptimizer [1].
We are currently failing some new unit tests, which are cloned from
existing PooledLoOptimizer tests which might be part of the problem.
Scott
[1] https://github.com/scottmarlow/hibernate-orm/tree/pooled-optimiser-hack
On 12
On 12/11/2015 09:30 AM, Steve Ebersole wrote:
> It's hard to say without understanding the scenario where you are seeing
> this as a problem. I have some guesses as to what may be the problem,
> but without understanding more about why you see this as a problem in
> the first place it is hard to
On 12/13/2015 08:44 PM, Stuart Douglas wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Scott Marlow"
>> To: "Stuart Douglas" , hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org
>> Sent: Friday, 11 December, 2015 10:54:15 PM
>> Subject: Re: [hibernate-dev]
; - Original Message -
>>> From: "Scott Marlow"
>>> To: "Stuart Douglas" , hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org
>>> Sent: Friday, 11 December, 2015 10:54:15 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [hibernate-dev] Pooled Optimiser Improvements
>>>
>&
To: "Stuart Douglas" , hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org
>> Sent: Friday, 11 December, 2015 10:54:15 PM
>> Subject: Re: [hibernate-dev] Pooled Optimiser Improvements
>>
>> Should this be a specialized pooled optimizer that is only used in
>> environments that do not suffer fro
- Original Message -
> From: "Scott Marlow"
> To: "Stuart Douglas" , hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org
> Sent: Friday, 11 December, 2015 10:54:15 PM
> Subject: Re: [hibernate-dev] Pooled Optimiser Improvements
>
> Should this be a specialized
It's hard to say without understanding the scenario where you are seeing
this as a problem. I have some guesses as to what may be the problem, but
without understanding more about why you see this as a problem in the first
place it is hard to give you an answer. For example, I wonder if for
envi
Should this be a specialized pooled optimizer that is only used in
environments that do not suffer from leaving the ThreadLocal around
after the application is undeployed? In other words, the expectation is
that classloader leaks with this pooled optimizer are expected (e.g.
user must restart
Hi Stuart,
if it has the same semantics as the existing one but is more efficient
I think it's ok to patch it. If it has different behaviour we'll
probably want it to be a new one, with a new name, configuration
options and documentation.
If I'm not wrong this is still managing a pool in memory an
20 matches
Mail list logo
