> Alan D. Cabrera [mailto:[email protected]] wrote: > > So, what is the scenario that we're trying to support? I imagine > appending headers to binary data would be one. In this case is an > Array of ByteBuffers really needed? Why not just send down one > ByteBuffer for the header and another for the body that was sent to > you?
When sending a Header, a Body and a Footer this means going 3 times through the (remaining) chain and in the end it may result in 3 TCP packages if tcpNoDelay is activated (The splitting may be a client design problem, so MINA could ignore it). As Julien mentioned, the CumulativeProtocolDecoder needs it to create an automatic expanding Buffer. > Searching for use cases where we need this complexity. :) This wouldn't be a problem, if SUN had designed ByteBuffer to be extendable, but with the package-private constructors you don't have a chance to write a Wrapper or something similar. regards Steve
