Hello,

I am very interested in this topic as well so I've been following up. So,
if I understand correctly, there is no other way to access the needed API's
without these flags, and the following (extract from Java documentation) is
an accepted risk?

"*The --add-exports and --add-opens options must be used with great care.
You can use them to gain access to an internal API of a library module, or
even of the JDK itself, but you do so at your own risk: If that internal
API is changed or removed then your library or application will fail."*

The quote is from the Breaking Encapsulation section in the link below:
https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/261



On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 2:15 PM Dmitriy Pavlov <dpav...@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi Shane,
>
> These flags are required to access JVM internals and are used by Ignite.
> And it is not related to production readiness.
>
> A number of projects require these flags. In theory in some future release
> Ignite can get rid of the mandatory specification of extra flags, but it
> will anyway affect performance. So in this scenario (if community accept
> it), Ignite will recommend to set it up but will be (much) slower without
> it.
>
> There are a number of open discussions at dev@ related to Java 11,
> modularity support. So AFAIK there are no exact plans.
>
> Sincerely,
> Dmitriy Pavlov
>
> вт, 12 мар. 2019 г. в 20:48, Shane Duan <sduane...@gmail.com>:
>
>> Currently running Ignite 2.7 with OpenJDK11, with these additional JVM
>> flags:
>>
>> --add-exports=java.base/jdk.internal.misc=ALL-UNNAMED 
>> --add-exports=java.base/sun.nio.ch=ALL-UNNAMED 
>> --add-exports=java.management/com.sun.jmx.mbeanserver=ALL-UNNAMED 
>> --add-exports=jdk.internal.jvmstat/sun.jvmstat.monitor=ALL-UNNAMED--add-exports=java.base/sun.reflect.generics.reflectiveObjects=ALL-UNNAMED--illegal-access=permit-Djdk.tls.client.protocols=TLSv1.2
>>
>>
>> It is working, but also brought some concerns whether Ignite is
>> production-ready...
>>
>> Any plan to remove these dependency on these flags in next release?
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> -Shane
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

Reply via email to