Mladen Turk wrote:
As you might see from the SVN log I added few more dist files.
The newly created files are:
apache-tomcat-7.0.0-dev-win32-x86-native.zip
apache-tomcat-7.0.0-dev-win64-ia64-native.zip
apache-tomcat-7.0.0-dev-win64-x86_64-native.zip
Author: markt
Date: Thu Jun 18 08:32:29 2009
New Revision: 785952
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=785952view=rev
Log:
Add some micro-benchmarks that enable the differences between the Sync and
ThreadLocal approach to be compared
Added:
tomcat/trunk/test/org/apache/catalina/valves/
Mladen Turk wrote:
Mark Thomas wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
As you might see from the SVN log I added few more dist files.
The newly created files are:
apache-tomcat-7.0.0-dev-win32-x86-native.zip
apache-tomcat-7.0.0-dev-win64-ia64-native.zip
apache-tomcat-7.0.0-dev-win64-x86_64-native.zip
Author: markt
Date: Thu Jun 18 08:52:01 2009
New Revision: 785961
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=785961view=rev
Log:
Add some comments re thread safety
Modified:
tomcat/current/tc5.5.x/STATUS.txt
Modified: tomcat/current/tc5.5.x/STATUS.txt
URL:
Author: markt
Date: Thu Jun 18 09:25:00 2009
New Revision: 785983
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=785983view=rev
Log:
Expand sync within rotatable block to fix a couple of issues:
- fileDateFormatter is a SimpleDateFormat which is not thread safe
- the rotationLastChecked needs to be
Mark Thomas wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
The standard .zip distro should contain only the bare tomcat.
Everything else like docs, deployer etc are already in separate packages.
The point is to have the same functionality as with .exe installer
but from individual peaces, just like you select which
2009/6/18 ma...@apache.org:
Author: markt
Date: Thu Jun 18 08:32:29 2009
New Revision: 785952
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=785952view=rev
Log:
Add some micro-benchmarks that enable the differences between the Sync and
ThreadLocal approach to be compared
Added:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47389
Summary: DeltaManager doesn't do the session replication.
(notifySessionListenersOnReplication=false)
Product: Tomcat 6
Version: 6.0.20
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
I think this needs to be volatile ?
In (GetDateBenchmarkTest)
+private long currentMillis = 0;
Same for (in TimeDateElementBenchmarkTest)
+private Date currentDate = null;
Of course - since the test is single threaded - it doesn't really matter.
-Tim
ma...@apache.org wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
Mark Thomas wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
The standard .zip distro should contain only the bare tomcat.
Everything else like docs, deployer etc are already in separate
packages.
The point is to have the same functionality as with .exe installer
but from individual peaces,
Tim Funk wrote:
I think this needs to be volatile ?
In (GetDateBenchmarkTest)
+private long currentMillis = 0;
Same for (in TimeDateElementBenchmarkTest)
+private Date currentDate = null;
Of course - since the test is single threaded - it doesn't really matter.
The test
Konstantin Kolinko wrote:
2009/6/18 ma...@apache.org:
Author: markt
Date: Thu Jun 18 08:32:29 2009
New Revision: 785952
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=785952view=rev
Log:
Add some micro-benchmarks that enable the differences between the Sync and
ThreadLocal approach to be
Author: markt
Date: Thu Jun 18 12:58:07 2009
New Revision: 786045
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=786045view=rev
Log:
Add volatiles as suggested by Tim to align code with AccessLogValve.
No significant change to results (on my machine at least ;)
Modified:
Do we really need to synchronize on this rather than separate some
individual locks for better lock granularity?
2009/6/18 ma...@apache.org
Author: markt
Date: Thu Jun 18 09:25:00 2009
New Revision: 785983
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=785983view=rev
Log:
Expand sync within
Xie Xiaodong wrote:
Do we really need to synchronize on this rather than separate some
individual locks for better lock granularity?
Looking at the benchmarks and the times for 10,000,000 iterations even with
additional competition for locks I don't think we need the complexity. I'd want
to see
Mark, since each of your thread runs a TestThread which implements runnable,
those thread do not access the field or method of other threads, I do not
think the test is multi-threaded. You could use one or two
your BenchmarkTest class, and let more than more thread access its method
instead.
sorry, maybe I misunderstood your code, I'll recheck it.
2009/6/18 Xie Xiaodong xxd82...@gmail.com
Mark, since each of your thread runs a TestThread which implements
runnable, those thread do not access the field or method of other threads, I
do not think the test is multi-threaded. You could
Author: fhanik
Date: Thu Jun 18 15:27:55 2009
New Revision: 786124
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=786124view=rev
Log:
Fix https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47389
patch provided by Keiichi Fujino
Modified:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47389
Filip Hanik fha...@apache.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Author: fhanik
Date: Thu Jun 18 15:31:13 2009
New Revision: 786125
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=786125view=rev
Log:
patch-proposal
Modified:
tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk/STATUS.txt
Modified: tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk/STATUS.txt
URL:
On 18/06/2009, Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org wrote:
Tim Funk wrote:
I think this needs to be volatile ?
In (GetDateBenchmarkTest)
+private long currentMillis = 0;
Same for (in TimeDateElementBenchmarkTest)
+private Date currentDate = null;
Of course - since
On 18/06/2009, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 18/06/2009, Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org wrote:
Tim Funk wrote:
I think this needs to be volatile ?
In (GetDateBenchmarkTest)
+private long currentMillis = 0;
Same for (in TimeDateElementBenchmarkTest)
+
Is the Tomcat 6 zip on the a repository somewhere? maven.org has the
5.5.23 distro up :
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/tomcat/apache-tomcat/5.5.23/
Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
I've uploaded 6.0.20 jars today, they will sync out shortly
Filip
Tom Cunningham wrote:
Is there a public
Author: fhanik
Date: Thu Jun 18 16:57:17 2009
New Revision: 786159
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=786159view=rev
Log:
Fix demo
Modified:
tomcat/trunk/modules/bayeux/webapps/cometd/examples/simplechat/ticker.html
Modified:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47308
Filip Hanik fha...@apache.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Author: fhanik
Date: Thu Jun 18 17:02:44 2009
New Revision: 786163
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=786163view=rev
Log:
patch to revert previous commit
Modified:
tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk/STATUS.txt
Modified: tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk/STATUS.txt
URL:
Mark Thomas wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
(I'm not even convinced we absolutely need CR-LF line endings).
The reason is that some platforms have limited default tar implementation
like Solaris (especially for long file names and paths).
I see where you are coming from but I think the line ending
Author: fhanik
Date: Thu Jun 18 17:08:38 2009
New Revision: 786165
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=786165view=rev
Log:
Fix https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47308
Patch provided by Keiichi Fujino with one change, default is false
Modified:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47342
--- Comment #1 from Filip Hanik fha...@apache.org 2009-06-18 11:16:14 PST ---
I'm unable to replicate your use case, mostly cause it seems as the className
attribute is ignored on the conf/context.xml element
--
Configure bugmail:
Hi,
Mark Thomas schrieb:
+1. If we get feedback from users that suggests changes we can re-evaluate.
I got in the past every now and then feedbacks from users who wanted to
upgrade TC from a previous version: they were really confused by the
single packages, and always asking 'what do I really
Guenter Knauf wrote:
Personally I would prefer something like the MSYS or Cygwin installer:
one executable (I think this could / should even be written in Java)
One thing I hate with Cygwin is it's installer, and with Mingw I really
have no clue what to download from the hundred or so things
I think the entire Benchmark test is wrong.
I'm not sure what we are trying to do in this test, in my mind we are
proving nothing with this test :)
The thread safety in AccessLogValve is the fact that the formatters are
not thread safe and can yield some funky dates showing up.
And in the
So now that we've clarified that NOTICE and LICENSE covers the entire
release as an entity,
my vote
[X] STABLE - I couldn't find any bugs
Filip
Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
Cleaned up and fixed.
The release is located here:
http://people.apache.org/~fhanik/jdbc-pool/v1.0.4/
ballot
[ ]
is no longer being picked up, at least not in my test.
I think it's related to the deploy refactor that has been going on,
possibly related to
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47343
Filip
-
To unsubscribe,
On 19/06/2009, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists devli...@hanik.com wrote:
So now that we've clarified that NOTICE and LICENSE covers the entire
release as an entity,
No idea what you mean by that, but anyway:
As I have written several times before, the NOTICE file is incorrect.
This applies to the
35 matches
Mail list logo
