On 22/11/05, Phil Steitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/21/05, Stephen Colebourne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
robert burrell donkin wrote:
i've been running the SOAK tests for over 7 days now without a problem.
Just to report that I have run the synchronized soak test using 5
threads and
On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 10:53 +, sebb wrote:
On 22/11/05, Phil Steitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/21/05, Stephen Colebourne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
robert burrell donkin wrote:
i've been running the SOAK tests for over 7 days now without a problem.
Just to report that I have run
On Mon, 2005-11-21 at 22:43 +, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
robert burrell donkin wrote:
snip
what is becoming clear to me is that a number of users have been
confused by the need to synchronize the maps. i've added some
clarifications to the javadocs for LRUMap.
would it be a good
On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 16:38 +, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
i would recommend keeping the bugzilla open but adding a comment
requesting that users ensure that the code is synchronized properly and
that they list the full environment (JVM and platform) plus information
about the keys they are
robert burrell donkin wrote:
i've been running the SOAK tests for over 7 days now without a problem.
if there is a bug in the collections code (as opposed to problems with
synchronization) then i don't think that it'll be discovered by those
tests. i can't see any reason for the code to fail
On 11/21/05, Stephen Colebourne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
robert burrell donkin wrote:
i've been running the SOAK tests for over 7 days now without a problem.
if there is a bug in the collections code (as opposed to problems with
synchronization) then i don't think that it'll be discovered
i would recommend keeping the bugzilla open but adding a comment
requesting that users ensure that the code is synchronized properly and
that they list the full environment (JVM and platform) plus information
about the keys they are using (and ideally a soak tests we can run).
that may give us
