You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to commits@river.apache.org by "Peter Firmstone (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2009/12/01 00:42:20 UTC

[jira] Updated: (RIVER-323) DynamicPolicyProvider - Concurrency

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RIVER-323?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Peter Firmstone updated RIVER-323:
----------------------------------

    Attachment:     (was: Concurrent_and_Revokeable_Permissions_Version4.patch)

> DynamicPolicyProvider - Concurrency
> -----------------------------------
>
>                 Key: RIVER-323
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RIVER-323
>             Project: River
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: net_jini_security
>         Environment: All
>            Reporter: Peter Firmstone
>            Assignee: Peter Firmstone
>            Priority: Minor
>         Attachments: Concurrent_and_Revokeable_Permissions_Version6.patch, ConcurrentPermissions_DynamicPolicyProvider.patch, ConcurrentPermissions_DynamicPolicyProviderVersion2.patch, ConcurrentPermissions_DynamicPolicyProviderVersion3.patch
>
>   Original Estimate: 40h
>  Remaining Estimate: 40h
>
> From the river-dev mail list:
> I have been looking into some seemingly slow responses in several clients running simultaneously, and I see in some stack traces that there are synchronization points in DynamicPolicyProvider.implies() that seem to be heavily contended.  We probably need to revisit this class and rewrite it to use copy on write mutation so that reads (the majority of activity) are completely uncontended.
> Any thoughts or experience with this issue?
> Gregg Wonderly

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.