I don't have a strong opinion either way. It's too bad we don't have
resource management features that would allow setting a memory limit on
the test or app while allowing the rest of the JVM to use memory
unrestricted. That might solve a lot of these OOM problems. Even after
we move to libgr
I'm not sure. You could problem list it, but then the question is which
bug to problem list it under, JDK-8195600 or JDK-8207267 (in which case
JDK-8195600 would be closed). I'd hate to see a separate CR for every
test that fails due to graal unexpectedly executing java code. But then
JDK-82072
Hi Dean and Chris,
Just wanted to check with you would it be OK now to add this issue to
Graal-specific problem list, as Dean suggested in one of the previous emails,
while the proposal about introducing new options for @requires is being
discussed?
-Thanks!
--Daniil
On 8/9/19, 3:37 PM, "
Hi David,
I think this change makes sense.
We'll test it and take a closer look at it.
First impression is good.
Best regards,
Martin
> -Original Message-
> From: David Holmes
> Sent: Dienstag, 27. August 2019 00:21
> To: serguei.spit...@oracle.com; serviceability-dev d...@openjdk.jav
Hi Alan,
Was wondering if you had had a chance to look at this please?
Thanks
Andrew
Andrew Leonard
Java Runtimes Development
IBM Hursley
IBM United Kingdom Ltd
internet email: andrew_m_leon...@uk.ibm.com
From: Andrew Leonard/UK/IBM
To: Alan Bateman
Cc: serviceability-dev@openjdk.j
