Java 9 build 148 causes trouble in Apache Lucene/Solr/Elasticsearch
peter.levart at gmail.com
Sun Dec 11 21:27:14 UTC 2016
On 12/11/2016 09:59 PM, Peter Levart wrote:
>> The alternative is of course:
>> ByteBuffer wrap(long address, int capacity)
>> void unmap(MappedByteBuffer)
>> The wrap method allow be similar to JNI's NewDirectByteBuffer for
>> those that are managing the underlying memory themselves. This makes
>> it a more advanced method to avoid too much temptation to free the
>> memory underlying a buffer created with ByteBuffer.allocateDirect. We
>> can't do much with unmap but that at least won't be widely used.
> So, If I understand correctly, you are proposing users to do their own
> memory allocation/management/deallocation with Unsafe and use wrap()
> just to create a view of the allocated memory in the form of
> ByteBuffer. Wouldn't this force them to use a different approach to
> managing ByteBuffer(s) from what they do now - they would have to keep
> the allocated memory's address somewhere outside the buffer in order
> to free the memory later... It is doable, but I think Uwe will not
> like it very much.
Sorry, I just realized that Uwe is interested only in the unmapping case...
> About unmap()... Is it just the name and signature that would
> discourage freeing memory underlying a buffer created with
> ByteBuffer.allocateDirect() or do you propose to disallow such use and
> only allow actual unmapping?
More information about the core-libs-dev