I also would prefer just "runtime", but "Java.runtime" is at least
better than anything with "Plugin" in the name...
-- Kevin
On 4/17/2019 3:45 PM, Andy Herrick wrote:
On 4/17/2019 6:33 PM, Andy Herrick wrote:
On 4/17/2019 6:18 PM, semyon.sadet...@oracle.com wrote:
bug: https://bugs.ope
Hi Severin,
I took a look at this (again**) and although I'm not at all familiar
with the actual cgroup facilities the changes seem reasonable in that
they only look for a hierarchical memory limit if the initial limit is
"unlimited".
So you can add me as a reviewer.
Thanks,
David
** I did
On 4/17/2019 6:33 PM, Andy Herrick wrote:
On 4/17/2019 6:18 PM, semyon.sadet...@oracle.com wrote:
bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8219683
webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ssadetsky/8219683/webrev.00/
The fix moves Java runtime form Contents/PlugIns/Java.runtime to
Conte
On 4/17/2019 6:18 PM, semyon.sadet...@oracle.com wrote:
bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8219683
webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ssadetsky/8219683/webrev.00/
The fix moves Java runtime form Contents/PlugIns/Java.runtime to
Contents/Java.runtime.
--Semyon
Is there any
bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8219683
webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ssadetsky/8219683/webrev.00/
The fix moves Java runtime form Contents/PlugIns/Java.runtime to
Contents/Java.runtime.
--Semyon
Thanks Per, your detailed insights make sense.
On 17/04/19 10:22 pm, Per Liden wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> On 04/17/2019 03:59 AM, Michael Pollmeier wrote:
>> Hi Per,
>>
>> While testing different JVMs I realized that it's fixed in openjdk 11,
>> e.g. openjdk version "11.0.1" 2018-10-16 LTS (zulu bu
Hi Christoph,
Overall, I think the changes look good.
Was there a reason that you did not leave the multi-release 9 test as is when
you added the 10 test?
As far as removing the jar file, I would think that would still want to be
done. I understand why you did this, not sure what the standard
Ping?
On Tue, 2019-04-09 at 11:33 +0200, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Could I get another reviewer for this, please? Bob Vandette already reviewed
> it.
>
> Thank you!
>
> Cheers,
> Severin
>
> On Tue, 2019-04-02 at 13:48 +0200, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> > Could I get a second review, plea
Hi Michael,
On 04/17/2019 03:59 AM, Michael Pollmeier wrote:
Hi Per,
While testing different JVMs I realized that it's fixed in openjdk 11,
e.g. openjdk version "11.0.1" 2018-10-16 LTS (zulu build), maybe by this
commit: https://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk/jdk/rev/6464882498b5
That bug only affec
Just a thought...
Would it be feasible to create a brand new "Generic Caching Filesystem"
implementation that would delegate to another filesystem for persistent
storage (be it ZipFilesystem or any other) and implement interesting
caching strategies (lazy flushing, concurrent flushing, etc...)
10 matches
Mail list logo