-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.9k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Fix errors in Mapped pool and javadoc #8264
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Greg Wilkins <[email protected]>
Also some real fixes now! |
@@ -302,4 +308,30 @@ public String toString() | |||
getMaxBucketSize(), | |||
getCapacityFactor()); | |||
} | |||
|
|||
protected class Retained extends ArrayRetainableByteBufferPool |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Seems strange to me that you would create a MappedByteBufferPool
and ask it for its RetainableBufferPool
and it gives you an array based implementation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yeah, but not sure we want to create a MappedRetainableByteBuffer pool. Prior to the combination of pool, this is exactly what we would have got if the user selected a MBBP, as we would have created an ARBBP. So just a bit strange that they are together.
I'm not actually sure if we really want to keep MBBP. @sbordet @lorban why do we have it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
AFAICT it's only used in the client, but I can't see why MBBP
was created in the first place and I lack history. So unless @sbordet has a good reason to keep it, that pool impl can go IMHO.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
OK, but for this PR, I'd like to fix javadoc and MBBP to unblock other work.
We can consider deprecating MBBP later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sounds good to me, and the change looks reasonable enough: currently MBBP is used together with a ARBBP so this change just solidifies a behavior that already exist.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@lorban can I get a green tick then please?
@lachlan-roberts @lorban Can I get this approved? |
I just noticed this was wrong with our buffer pool javadoc
Signed-off-by: Greg Wilkins [email protected]