1.x: fix observeOn resource handling, add delayError capability #3682
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
👍 |
akarnokd
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 10, 2016
1.x: fix observeOn resource handling, add delayError capability
This was referenced Mar 13, 2016
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR fixes the "messing around" reported in #3002 and adds an overload to
observeOnthat allows delaying errors without the need for wrapping (see #3542 and maybe there are other reports).In addition, this PR adds a proper override of the
isEmptymethod to simply compare the two indexes for emptiness directly instead ofsize() == 0to avoid looping, multi-reading and casting.Benchmark comparison (i7 4790, Windows 7 x64, Java 8u66):
Note that the benchmark is generally quite noisy, yielding hectic results (i.e., firing up a thread with newThread may take quite some random microseconds). For example,
observeOnImmediateshouldn't be affected by any of the changes yet the run-to-run variance is +/- 10%. I'm fine with the results of the benchmark.