Request for review: 6941923: RFE: Handling large log files produced by long running Java Applications

Jesper Wilhelmsson jesper.wilhelmsson at oracle.com
Mon May 2 07:05:17 PDT 2011


Yumin,

Took a closer look this time and noticed that you introduce a fourth new flag 
in addition to the three mentioned in the CR, -XX:GCLogFile. I have to admit 
that I like the new name better than the old -Xloggc, but do we really want to 
introduce a new flag with identical behavior as the old?

If we can deprecate the old flag and remove it in a few releases I would be 
happy to endorse the new flag, but I suspect that -Xloggc is quite heavily 
used in production environments.


I am a bit puzzled by a change in ostream.cpp, in ostream_init_log():

  807   if (gclog_or_tty != NULL && gclog_or_tty != tty) {
  808     delete gclog_or_tty;
  809   }

Why is this needed? As far as I can tell gclog_or_tty will never have a value 
here, the only assignment to that variable is made on the next line in the 
same function and the function will only be called once during initialization 
of the jvm. Have you seen cases where this delete is executed?
/Jesper


On 04/29/2011 07:15 PM, yumin.qi at oracle.com wrote:
> Jesper,
>
> Thanks. Deleted the comments part, this is the new version:
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~minqi/6941923/webrev.02
>
> Thanks
> Yumin
>
> On 4/29/2011 5:25 AM, Jesper Wilhelmsson wrote:
>> Yumin,
>>
>> In ostream.hpp lines 199 - 215 you have added a block of code that is
>> commented out. Personally I don't think we should have code that is
>> commented out in there unless there is a good documentation reason for it. I
>> don't see such a reason here.
>>
>> Looks good otherwise.
>> /Jesper
>>
>>
>>
>> On 04/28/2011 11:18 PM, yumin.qi at oracle.com wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Need your review on the second time changes:
>>>
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~minqi/6941923/webrev.01
>>>
>>> Any comments on the revised version? thanks in advance.
>>>
>>> Yumin
>>>


More information about the hotspot-gc-dev mailing list