Rémy,
On 6/15/15 5:10 AM, Rémy Maucherat wrote:
> 2015-06-15 10:42 GMT+02:00 Mark Thomas :
>
>>> It seems they are used in etPeerCertChain() and getCiphers() only, if
>>> someone uses client certificates than might make sense.
>>
>> Those will get called more than once so no objection to caching
2015-06-15 10:42 GMT+02:00 Mark Thomas :
> > It seems they are used in etPeerCertChain() and getCiphers() only, if
> > someone uses client certificates than might make sense.
>
> Those will get called more than once so no objection to caching those
> classes here.
>
> No prooblem with adding that
On 15/06/2015 09:35, jean-frederic clere wrote:
> On 06/15/2015 08:25 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
>> On 15/06/2015 06:55, jean-frederic clere wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> The netty-tcnative is based on the 1.1.x so the porting taking more than
>>> excepted.
>>
>> Are you going to be able to commit this in mul
On 06/15/2015 08:25 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
On 15/06/2015 06:55, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Hi,
The netty-tcnative is based on the 1.1.x so the porting taking more than
excepted.
Are you going to be able to commit this in multiple commits or is it
going to be one big commit?
A big commit it
On 15/06/2015 06:55, jean-frederic clere wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The netty-tcnative is based on the 1.1.x so the porting taking more than
> excepted.
Are you going to be able to commit this in multiple commits or is it
going to be one big commit?
> I would like some comments on the class caching for pe
Hi,
The netty-tcnative is based on the 1.1.x so the porting taking more than
excepted.
I would like some comments on the class caching for performances like in
ssl.c:
+++
TCN_FREE_CSTRING(engine);
+
+/* Cache the byte[].class for performance reasons */
+clazz = (*e)->FindClass(e,
