Proposal for adding O_DIRECT support into JDK 9

[Lu, Yingqi]

Alan,

Thank you for the explanation, we will modify the code accordingly and send it out soon for review.

Thanks,
Lucy

-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Bateman [mailto:Alan.Bateman at oracle.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2016 8:45 AM
To: Lu, Yingqi <yingqi.lu at intel.com>; core-libs-dev at openjdk.java.net
Cc: nio-dev at openjdk.java.net
Subject: Re: Proposal for adding O_DIRECT support into JDK 9

On 26/09/2016 19:50, Lu, Yingqi wrote:

> Alan, you mean readv0/write0 or read0/write0? I just want to make sure 
> :-)
Apologies, I meant each of the native methods where the decision to use direct I/O or not would be a lot more maintainable in Java. You'll see that there are already code paths for direct vs. heap buffers.


>
> Anyone else has other opinions on where is the best home for O_DIRECT flag? The flags under jdk.unsupported will eventually be removed in the future JDK release?
>
> If we agree ExtendedOpenOpen is the best home for O_DIRECT, we can modify that for sure.
>
I think ExtendedOpenOption is the right place. It's still TDB as to whether to put these extensions but that should be transparent to anyone using this when on the class path.

-Alan