https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56953
Mark Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |WONTFIX
--- Comment #21 from Mark Th
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56953
--- Comment #20 from hzha...@ebay.com ---
(In reply to Konstantin Kolinko from comment #19)
> Note that there was a regression caused by this change - bug 57173.
I checked the case, and the problem does exist because I didn't implement
seve
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56953
--- Comment #19 from Konstantin Kolinko ---
Note that there was a regression caused by this change - bug 57173.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56953
--- Comment #18 from hzha...@ebay.com ---
Thanks for your advice.
These points are extremely wise.
(In reply to Konstantin Kolinko from comment #15)
> OK, this is better.
>
> 1. Formatting: the code shall not use tab characters
>
> 2. In
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56953
Mark Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56953
--- Comment #16 from Mark Thomas ---
Patch has been applied to 7.0.x for 7.0.56 onwards.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
-
To u
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56953
--- Comment #15 from Konstantin Kolinko ---
OK, this is better.
1. Formatting: the code shall not use tab characters
2. In "skipBytes(int n)": there is no reason to call "fillNew()" after calling
"in.skip(n - sum)" on the underlying stre
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56953
--- Comment #14 from Mark Thomas ---
Thanks for the updated patches. I see a 20-25% improvement with the patch so it
has been applied to 8.0.x for 8.0.13 onwards.
I'll look into porting it to 7.0.x.
--
You are receiving this mail because
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56953
--- Comment #13 from hzha...@ebay.com ---
Sorry for the delay.
New patch applies on TRUNK, and the codes borrowed from GPL has been changed.
Benefit shows bellow(300 jar files involved in this test):
=Call FDIS first=
DataInputStrea
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56953
--- Comment #12 from hzha...@ebay.com ---
Created attachment 32031
--> https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32031&action=edit
Test case
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
--
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56953
--- Comment #11 from hzha...@ebay.com ---
Created attachment 32030
--> https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32030&action=edit
FastDataInputStream implementation
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56953
hzha...@ebay.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #32008|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56953
--- Comment #9 from Konstantin Kolinko ---
A large portion of "your" code is apparently borrowed from some software that
uses GPL license. You cannot contribute such code to an Apache project.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You a
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56953
--- Comment #8 from hzha...@ebay.com ---
OK, and I'm working on this.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56953
--- Comment #7 from Mark Thomas ---
With the various other changes and improvements back-ported to 7.0.x, I'm
prepared to consider this idea if the benefit justifies it. That said, we need
a patch that implements this idea - and just this i
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56953
--- Comment #6 from Konstantin Kolinko ---
The point of java.io.BufferedInputStream() is that is.read() were fast enough.
I do not see much benefit in re-implementing standard JRE classes.
By the way, is.read() is a blocking method. If you
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56953
--- Comment #5 from Mark Thomas ---
If you continue to ignore the comments you are given then this issue is going
to get closed as WONTFIX.
Your first patch was 86k and full of irrelevant changes. The second attempt is
worse at 107k.
Star
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56953
--- Comment #4 from hzha...@ebay.com ---
(In reply to Mark Thomas from comment #2)
> The patch is no good. It includes a whole bunch of changes unrelated to this
> issue.
It is indeed a problem.
The change should be simpler than it shows in
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56953
hzha...@ebay.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #31993|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56953
Mark Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
OS||All
--- Comment #2 from Mark Thomas
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56953
hzha...@ebay.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||56955
--
You are receiving this
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56953
hzha...@ebay.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #31993|0 |1
is patch|
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56953
--- Comment #1 from hzha...@ebay.com ---
Created attachment 31994
--> https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31994&action=edit
test case
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---
23 matches
Mail list logo
