Request for review: JEP: GC Interface: Better isolation of GC implementations

[kirk.pepperdine at gmail.com]

Hi Roman,

I have no official say in this but it the object is quite clear spelled out and certainly is desirable. That said the spec is written at a high enough level that it’s not clear about the complexity and hence dangers/risks in (failing to ) identifying/isolating all the touch points is spelled out.

Also, should we comment on testing here? Will this work require a new set of regression tests? Or, is that beyond the scope of this document?

Kind regards,
Kirk

> On Nov 15, 2016, at 7:02 PM, Roman Kennke <rkennke at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> No comments on that one?
> 
> I'd like to move it to 'submitted' if nobody objects.
> 
> Roman
> 
> Am Dienstag, den 16.08.2016, 19:37 +0200 schrieb Roman Kennke:
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> I would like to ask for your opinion on the JEP draft:
>> 
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8163329
>> 
>> It was born out of the discussion around JEP 291: Deprecate the
>> Concurrent Mark Sweep (CMS) Garbage Collector, and the development of
>> the Shenandoah GC, both of which would benefit greatly from better GC
>> isolation.
>> 
>> Best regards, Roman