+1 on the string vs DirectoryInfo overload, Iatmar Re: Comments and JVM, I'd suggest editing the .NET comments to remove Java specific recommendations/concerns. We're not running on the JVM, so consumes of our code don't need that info.
Re: GC pressure on the File/DirectoryInfo objects.. There's so few of them it really doesn't make a difference. That aspect of their usage should not be a concern. A greater concern is that they don't really support the full range of Win32API file access (eg long paths, etc). Thanks, Troy On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Christopher Currens <currens.ch...@gmail.com> wrote: > That comment is correct. We don't have support for NIOFSDirectory in .NET > (and the JVM support for it in windows has a major bug). We also don't > support MMapDirectory, because we haven't bothered to support it yet. I > think digy ported it once, but it didn't add any speed benefits, and was > actually fairly slower than the FSDirectory classes. > > It wasn't that long ago that we had the string constructors for Directory > classes. I think they were in the java code and then replace with File > (DirectoryInfo for .NET). I've always hated passing in DirectoryInfo, and > I don't really understand why it's in the code. It doesn't seem to give > much added benefit, if any. You can pass a string that is a path to an > existing file and it will still create the DirectoryInfo object. I would > think (but don't know) it would be better for performance to *not* use the > File and Directory classes (I'm actually not sure how deep the usages of > these classes go, so I'm not sure what difference it would make), since it > results in added pressure on the GC with the extra object creations. > > +1 to this. > > On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 5:25 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <ita...@code972.com>wrote: > >> I'd assume so, at least partially >> >> I just copy-pasted from one method below >> >> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 2:52 PM, Stefan Bodewig <bode...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> >> > On 2012-06-14, <synhers...@apache.org> wrote: >> > >> > >> /// <p/>Currently this returns <see >> > cref="SimpleFSDirectory" /> as >> > >> /// NIOFSDirectory is currently not supported. >> > >> /// >> > >> /// <p/><b>NOTE</b>: this method may suddenly change >> which >> > >> /// implementation is returned from release to release, >> in >> > >> /// the event that higher performance defaults become >> > >> /// possible; if the precise implementation is important >> to >> > >> /// your application, please instantiate it directly, >> > >> /// instead. On 64 bit systems, it may also good to >> > >> /// return <see cref="MMapDirectory" />, but this is >> > disabled >> > >> /// because of officially missing unmap support in Java. >> > >> /// For optimal performance you should consider using >> > >> /// this implementation on 64 bit JVMs. >> > >> > Does this apply to the .NET code? >> > >> > Stefan >> > >> > >>
