2016-10-27 15:42 GMT+03:00 Mark Thomas :
>
> On 27/10/2016 12:59, Rémy Maucherat wrote:
> > 2016-10-27 13:24 GMT+02:00 Violeta Georgieva :
> >
> >> So are you OK to have in Tomcat 8.5 the read/write with ByteBuffer in
> >> CoyoteInputStream/CoyoteOutputStream?
> >> The main purpose for this refacto
2016-10-27 14:59 GMT+03:00 Rémy Maucherat :
>
> 2016-10-27 13:24 GMT+02:00 Violeta Georgieva :
>
> > So are you OK to have in Tomcat 8.5 the read/write with ByteBuffer in
> > CoyoteInputStream/CoyoteOutputStream?
> > The main purpose for this refactoring was to introduce them without
> > regression
On 27/10/2016 12:59, Rémy Maucherat wrote:
> 2016-10-27 13:24 GMT+02:00 Violeta Georgieva :
>
>> So are you OK to have in Tomcat 8.5 the read/write with ByteBuffer in
>> CoyoteInputStream/CoyoteOutputStream?
>> The main purpose for this refactoring was to introduce them without
>> regression in th
2016-10-27 13:24 GMT+02:00 Violeta Georgieva :
> So are you OK to have in Tomcat 8.5 the read/write with ByteBuffer in
> CoyoteInputStream/CoyoteOutputStream?
> The main purpose for this refactoring was to introduce them without
> regression in the performance.
> I would like to have these APIs in
2016-10-27 0:44 GMT+03:00 Rémy Maucherat :
>
> 2016-10-26 20:45 GMT+02:00 Violeta Georgieva :
>
> > Hi Remy,
> >
> > 2016-10-25 1:49 GMT+03:00 Rémy Maucherat :
> > >
> > > 2016-10-24 20:18 GMT+02:00 Violeta Georgieva :
> > >
> > > > There are no issues reported for the refactored functionality
avai
2016-10-26 20:45 GMT+02:00 Violeta Georgieva :
> Hi Remy,
>
> 2016-10-25 1:49 GMT+03:00 Rémy Maucherat :
> >
> > 2016-10-24 20:18 GMT+02:00 Violeta Georgieva :
> >
> > > There are no issues reported for the refactored functionality available
> in
> > > 9.0.0.M11.
> > > I think it is safe to back p
Hi Remy,
2016-10-25 1:49 GMT+03:00 Rémy Maucherat :
>
> 2016-10-24 20:18 GMT+02:00 Violeta Georgieva :
>
> > There are no issues reported for the refactored functionality available
in
> > 9.0.0.M11.
> > I think it is safe to back port the changes for the next 8.5 release.
> > Do you see any issues
2016-10-24 20:18 GMT+02:00 Violeta Georgieva :
> There are no issues reported for the refactored functionality available in
> 9.0.0.M11.
> I think it is safe to back port the changes for the next 8.5 release.
> Do you see any issues?
>
> Ok, so it probably works. I suppose it's up to me, at some p
Hi Remy,
2016-10-09 22:34 GMT+03:00 Violeta Georgieva :
>
> Hi,
>
> 2016-10-03 18:21 GMT+03:00 Rémy Maucherat :
> >
> > 2016-10-03 16:58 GMT+02:00 Violeta Georgieva :
> >
> > > Does this means that you are Ok to back port the ByteBuffer
replacement in
> > > Tomcat 8.5?
> > >
> > > I don't want to
Hi,
2016-10-03 18:21 GMT+03:00 Rémy Maucherat :
>
> 2016-10-03 16:58 GMT+02:00 Violeta Georgieva :
>
> > Does this means that you are Ok to back port the ByteBuffer replacement
in
> > Tomcat 8.5?
> >
> > I don't want to sound too annoying, but it's not tested enough and 8.5
is
> stable. Also, it's
2016-10-03 16:58 GMT+02:00 Violeta Georgieva :
> Does this means that you are Ok to back port the ByteBuffer replacement in
> Tomcat 8.5?
>
> I don't want to sound too annoying, but it's not tested enough and 8.5 is
stable. Also, it's not done yet, right ? I think it should be complete
(InputBuffe
2016-10-03 17:53 GMT+03:00 Rémy Maucherat :
>
> 2016-10-03 15:57 GMT+02:00 Violeta Georgieva :
>
> > Hi Remy,
> >
> > Did you manage to check or test the changed that I made?
> > In case you have doubts for some scenarios let me know and I will test
it.
> >
> > Hum, I tested plain text as well as O
2016-10-03 15:57 GMT+02:00 Violeta Georgieva :
> Hi Remy,
>
> Did you manage to check or test the changed that I made?
> In case you have doubts for some scenarios let me know and I will test it.
>
> Hum, I tested plain text as well as OpenSSL, this should (hopefully) cover
the worst cases. Althou
Hi Remy,
2016-09-29 0:08 GMT+03:00 Violeta Georgieva :
>
> Hi,
>
>
> 2016-09-22 22:21 GMT+03:00 Violeta Georgieva :
> >
> >
> >
> > 2016-09-22 18:29 GMT+03:00 Rémy Maucherat :
> > >
> > > 2016-09-22 17:13 GMT+02:00 Violeta Georgieva :
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > 2016-09-14 20:43 GMT+03:00 Ré
Hi,
2016-09-22 22:21 GMT+03:00 Violeta Georgieva :
>
>
>
> 2016-09-22 18:29 GMT+03:00 Rémy Maucherat :
> >
> > 2016-09-22 17:13 GMT+02:00 Violeta Georgieva :
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > 2016-09-14 20:43 GMT+03:00 Rémy Maucherat :
> > > >
> > > > 2016-09-13 20:07 GMT+02:00 Violeta Georgieva :
> > > >
2016-09-22 18:29 GMT+03:00 Rémy Maucherat :
>
> 2016-09-22 17:13 GMT+02:00 Violeta Georgieva :
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > 2016-09-14 20:43 GMT+03:00 Rémy Maucherat :
> > >
> > > 2016-09-13 20:07 GMT+02:00 Violeta Georgieva :
> > >
> > > > I would like to back port these changes to Tomcat 8.5 if you do not
>
2016-09-22 17:13 GMT+02:00 Violeta Georgieva :
> Hi,
>
> 2016-09-14 20:43 GMT+03:00 Rémy Maucherat :
> >
> > 2016-09-13 20:07 GMT+02:00 Violeta Georgieva :
> >
> > > I would like to back port these changes to Tomcat 8.5 if you do not
> have
> > > any concerns.
> > >
> > > -0.1. I think this is ok,
Hi,
2016-09-14 20:43 GMT+03:00 Rémy Maucherat :
>
> 2016-09-13 20:07 GMT+02:00 Violeta Georgieva :
>
> > I would like to back port these changes to Tomcat 8.5 if you do not have
> > any concerns.
> >
> > -0.1. I think this is ok, but not certain yet.
> - Performance is ok for the "common" unencryp
Hi,
2016-09-14 14:37 GMT+03:00 Mark Thomas :
>
> On 13/09/2016 19:07, Violeta Georgieva wrote:
> > 2016-08-30 15:35 GMT+03:00 Violeta Georgieva :
>
>
>
> >> I introduced CoyoteOutputStream.write(ByteBuffer) it uses new methods
> >> with ByteBuffer instead of ByteChunk.
> >> Next step is to replac
2016-09-13 20:07 GMT+02:00 Violeta Georgieva :
> I would like to back port these changes to Tomcat 8.5 if you do not have
> any concerns.
>
> -0.1. I think this is ok, but not certain yet.
- Performance is ok for the "common" unencrypted scenario, but it could go
down if using SSL, for example [=
On 13/09/2016 19:07, Violeta Georgieva wrote:
> 2016-08-30 15:35 GMT+03:00 Violeta Georgieva :
>> I introduced CoyoteOutputStream.write(ByteBuffer) it uses new methods
>> with ByteBuffer instead of ByteChunk.
>> Next step is to replace ByteChunk/CharChunk usage in CoyoteOutputStream
>> with Byte
Hi,
2016-08-30 15:35 GMT+03:00 Violeta Georgieva :
>
> Hi,
>
> 2016-08-24 16:44 GMT+03:00 Violeta Georgieva :
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Currently it is not possible to use
ServletInputStream.read/ServletOutputStream.write methods with ByteBuffer.
To enable such scenarios in Tomcat I would like to extend
Hi,
2016-08-24 16:44 GMT+03:00 Violeta Georgieva :
>
> Hi,
>
> Currently it is not possible to use
ServletInputStream.read/ServletOutputStream.write methods with ByteBuffer.
To enable such scenarios in Tomcat I would like to extend the Tomcat’s
internal implementation (CoyoteInputStream/CoyoteOutp
Hi,
Currently it is not possible to use
ServletInputStream.read/ServletOutputStream.write methods with ByteBuffer.
To enable such scenarios in Tomcat I would like to extend the Tomcat’s
internal implementation (CoyoteInputStream/CoyoteOutputStream). I already
did some refactoring in ByteChunk/Char
24 matches
Mail list logo
