Re: NIO 2 connector

2014-03-10 Thread Rémy Maucherat
2014-03-10 14:03 GMT+01:00 Konstantin Kolinko : > There are 52 warning shown by Eclipse IDE. > Most of them are boxing/unboxing ones. > > To remind, the setting are documented here: > res\ide-support\eclipse\java-compiler-errors-warnings.txt > Ahah, ok, NIO2 does a lof of boxing/unboxing indeed.

Re: NIO 2 connector

2014-03-10 Thread Konstantin Kolinko
2014-03-08 4:41 GMT+04:00 Rémy Maucherat : > 2014-03-07 23:16 GMT+01:00 Konstantin Kolinko : > >> 1. It is a month since release 8.0.3 and thus I think 8.0.4 is >> expected in a week or so.. >> >> I am -1 to destabilize 8.0.x now. >> > > As a new component, it is not supposed to destabilize the oth

Re: NIO 2 connector

2014-03-07 Thread Rémy Maucherat
2014-03-07 23:16 GMT+01:00 Konstantin Kolinko : > 1. It is a month since release 8.0.3 and thus I think 8.0.4 is > expected in a week or so.. > > I am -1 to destabilize 8.0.x now. > As a new component, it is not supposed to destabilize the other components that are in 8.0. > > To this, as you ar

Re: NIO 2 connector

2014-03-07 Thread Konstantin Kolinko
2014-03-07 19:17 GMT+04:00 Rémy Maucherat : > 2014-03-04 17:16 GMT+01:00 Rémy Maucherat : > >> The code is there (rebased to the current trunk): >> https://github.com/rmaucher/tomcat >> >> Updated commit here: > https://github.com/rmaucher/tomcat/commit/614d8c43d8d1f3eeb4d5e4c2493ead589a72bf2c > >

Re: NIO 2 connector

2014-03-07 Thread Rémy Maucherat
2014-03-04 17:16 GMT+01:00 Rémy Maucherat : > The code is there (rebased to the current trunk): > https://github.com/rmaucher/tomcat > > Updated commit here: https://github.com/rmaucher/tomcat/commit/614d8c43d8d1f3eeb4d5e4c2493ead589a72bf2c I have removed the two main hacks and the testsuite stat

Re: NIO 2 connector

2014-03-05 Thread Christopher Schultz
Rémy, On 3/4/14, 2:23 PM, Rémy Maucherat wrote: > 2014-03-04 19:26 GMT+01:00 Mark Thomas : >> >> Can you wait until we split 8.0.x from trunk or did you want to get this >> into 8.0.x? >> > > Depends, if you want to branch soon or not. It would have to be > experimental for a while anyway, but it

Re: NIO 2 connector

2014-03-04 Thread jean-frederic clere
On 03/04/2014 07:26 PM, Mark Thomas wrote: Can you wait until we split 8.0.x from trunk or did you want to get this into 8.0.x? I would like to see it in 8.0.x so we can have it in the talk Chris and I present at the ApacheCon. Cheers Jean-Frederic

Re: NIO 2 connector

2014-03-04 Thread Rémy Maucherat
2014-03-04 21:51 GMT+01:00 Mark Thomas : > >> Can you wait until we split 8.0.x from trunk or did you want to get this > >> into 8.0.x? > >> > > > > Depends, if you want to branch soon or not. It would have to be > > experimental for a while anyway, but it will likely bring something > useful. > >

Re: NIO 2 connector

2014-03-04 Thread Mark Thomas
On 04/03/2014 19:23, Rémy Maucherat wrote: > 2014-03-04 19:26 GMT+01:00 Mark Thomas : > >> On 04/03/2014 16:16, Rémy Maucherat wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I've been working on porting a NIO2 connector that was originally >> developed >>> for JBoss AS by Nabil Benothman (an intern at Red Hat). Due to th

Re: NIO 2 connector

2014-03-04 Thread Rémy Maucherat
2014-03-04 19:26 GMT+01:00 Mark Thomas : > On 04/03/2014 16:16, Rémy Maucherat wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I've been working on porting a NIO2 connector that was originally > developed > > for JBoss AS by Nabil Benothman (an intern at Red Hat). Due to the very > > different connector structure in Tomca

Re: NIO 2 connector

2014-03-04 Thread Mark Thomas
On 04/03/2014 16:16, Rémy Maucherat wrote: > Hi, > > I've been working on porting a NIO2 connector that was originally developed > for JBoss AS by Nabil Benothman (an intern at Red Hat). Due to the very > different connector structure in Tomcat and my preference for basing it on > the existing NIO

Re: NIO 2 connector

2014-03-04 Thread jean-frederic clere
On 03/04/2014 05:16 PM, Rémy Maucherat wrote: Pros: - Significantly faster, although the API looks slower by design Actually I didn't bench it yet but I benched "something similar" on JBossWeb: it performed faster than APR, the implementation is a bit different in that area so I will retest i