I have to give credit to Sun, once we finally got them to open the
issue and take a look they addressed it very quickly.
http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6401245
Thanks everyone...
Cheers,
Eric Molitor
On 3/13/06, Rick Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>So
You are correct, the format is as follows.
Command Packet
* Header
o length (4 bytes)
o id (4 bytes)
o flags (1 byte)
o command set (1 byte)
o command (1 byte)
* data (Variable)
Reply Packet
* Header
Am I correct in assuming by Client you mean Eclipse and by "the other
side" you mean the JDK?
On 3/10/06, Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The strace shows that the client? does lots of little send's
> also, the response is handled in a different thread than the sender so they
> spen
> Was there a trace posted somewhere? I would indeed like to look at it.
> I'd be quite happy to slam java it it happened to be putting logically
> associated data onto the connection in separate send calls :)
It was sent to Bugzilla but too large so Andrew Morton kindly uploaded it to
htt
Molitor
On 3/10/06, David S. Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: "Eric Molitor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2006 22:39:16 -0600
>
> > Its pretty bad on both. But most Java developers debug via localhost.
> > The slowdowns don't
Its pretty bad on both. But most Java developers debug via localhost.
The slowdowns don't occur on Windows, Solaris, or the unoficial JDK
port to BSD. But I dont know what kernels support ABC. For now I will
see what sun does with the bug report and then chase after IBM. IBM
tends to be more willin
I did open up a bug with SUN about this. It looks like most clients
dont set TCP_NODELAY on debug sockets but the JDK itself has
TCP_NODELAY hardcoded.
In the meantime is there a way to set or disable Appropriate Byte
Counting on a per interface basis? (I know that its a protocal but the
abiltiy t
Just out of curiosity was the window size changed in 2.6.15? Just
trying to get an idea of what might have changed in 2.6.15 that
triggered this. (In 2.6.14 and 2.4.27 things run very fast)
On 3/9/06, Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 23:29:48 -0800 (PST)
> "David
Just to clarify this should be reproducable with any Java Debug tool
(IntelliJ, Eclipse, etc) The slow down increases with the scope of the
current Frame. If you have a simple scope of say 5 basic objects then
things are slow but liveable. If you have a large scope of say 22
objects several of whic
