Renè Glanzer wrote at Mittwoch, 17. Juni 2009 20:09:
> I only gave it a short test. Then i found the MapIterator in the docs an
> switched to it.
> The docs stated that MapIterator is the better way than entrySet.
> Sorry for this, I'm at home right now so i can test it with an entrySet at
> the e
I only gave it a short test. Then i found the MapIterator in the docs an
switched to it.
The docs stated that MapIterator is the better way than entrySet.
Sorry for this, I'm at home right now so i can test it with an entrySet at
the earliest tomorrow.
Looking forward to report the result.
2009/6
Renè Glanzer wrote at Mittwoch, 17. Juni 2009 16:07:
> Hi,
>
> it's me again with an update.
> the LRUMap.mapIterator() still produces the
> ConcurrentModificationException when a call to MapIterator.remove()
> occurs.
So did you also try with the entrySet? I've not written a unit test for the
M
Well, I hope your hash function is well thought through :-)
otherwise using hashmap for caching might be a mess
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 4:30 PM, Renè Glanzer wrote:
> I was searching for a very lighweight cache systems with not much overhead
> for my purposes. The LRUMap just matched
> perfect
Hi all,
is it possible to persist the state of an scxml instance into a database ?
What would be the api call structure to achieve this? I understand that the
junits have roundtrip testcase to check for serialization and
deserialization. However, file system based operations are not currently
env
I was searching for a very lighweight cache systems with not much overhead
for my purposes. The LRUMap just matched
perfectly except the little iterator problem.
2009/6/17 James Carman
> Or, ehcache or oscache or something like that?
>
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:17 AM, Leon
> Rosenberg wrote:
Or, ehcache or oscache or something like that?
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:17 AM, Leon
Rosenberg wrote:
> why don't you just use softreference + expiration timestamp and save
> all the trouble?
> Leon
>
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 4:07 PM, Renè Glanzer wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> it's me again with an update
Hi Nestor,
Has there been any update you have on state persistence for scxml ?
Regards,
R2D2.
Nestor Urquiza-3 wrote:
>
> Yes I will keep you posted and in fact I am evaluating
> to use iBATIC (I posted the question to javaranch,
> iBATIC and Hibernate forums) because seems like iBATIC
> create
why don't you just use softreference + expiration timestamp and save
all the trouble?
Leon
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 4:07 PM, Renè Glanzer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> it's me again with an update.
> the LRUMap.mapIterator() still produces the
> ConcurrentModificationException when a call to MapIterator.remove(
Hi,
it's me again with an update.
the LRUMap.mapIterator() still produces the
ConcurrentModificationException when a call to MapIterator.remove()
occurs.
Maybe this info helps
René
2009/6/17 Renè Glanzer :
> Hi Jörg,
>
> it's me again. With a smile on my face :-)
>
> I changed my code according
Hi Jörg,
it's me again. With a smile on my face :-)
I changed my code according to your hint.
Now i don't use the keySet but the entrySet. With only to adopt the rest of
the method to the entrySet and still
calling the remove() method of the iterator in my tests no
ConcurrentModificationException
Renè Glanzer wrote at Mittwoch, 17. Juni 2009 11:48:
> Hi Jörg,
>
> that are great news, I'll give it a try.
> And of course I'll report my experience.
That would be fine. Actually I opened an own JIRA issue for this now
(COLLECTION-330), COLLECTION-3 was simply too vague and had a too long
hist
Hi Jörg,
that are great news, I'll give it a try.
And of course I'll report my experience.
René
2009/6/17 Jörg Schaible
> Hi Renè,
>
> Renè Glanzer wrote at Mittwoch, 17. Juni 2009 09:47:
>
> > OK so my search will continue :-)
> > Meanwhile I'll consider to change my implementation, which i'
Hi Renè,
Renè Glanzer wrote at Mittwoch, 17. Juni 2009 09:47:
> OK so my search will continue :-)
> Meanwhile I'll consider to change my implementation, which i'd like to
> prevent.
I've reopened COLLECTIONS-3, since I was able to write a unit test that
reproduces the problem.
> Maybe somebody
OK so my search will continue :-)
Meanwhile I'll consider to change my implementation, which i'd like to
prevent.
Maybe somebody of you knows a time and size based cache system where i can
map a key to an object?
René
2009/6/16 Otis Gospodnetic
>
> That's the one, René. Yeah, no real solutio
15 matches
Mail list logo