Proposal for adding O_DIRECT support into JDK 9

[huaming.li at oracle.com]

Got it, thanks for clarifying.

-Hamlin


On 06/09/2017 5:06 AM, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
> On Sep 4, 2017, at 8:44 PM, huaming.li at oracle.com 
> <mailto:huaming.li at oracle.com> wrote:
>
>> Maybe we need to add some comments in the test, I'm not sure if 
>> @intermittent is needed to be added into test. So when test fails in 
>> the future, it can be analyzed quickly.
>
> I don’t know that it’s a good idea to add @intermittent until we know 
> that it is so.
>
>>> I can add tests for case 1. I think other cases are covered with the 
>>> existing tests. Please let me know if I missed anything though.
>> The major reason I asked above several questions is that direct io 
>> works a little different from non-direct io, but currently we don't 
>> have a java doc to state this behavior difference, I think it would 
>> be helpful for direct io end users if we do so, but I'm not sure 
>> where to add this java doc, and how detailed it should be.
>
> I think that the javadoc of ExtendedOpenOption#DIRECT is sufficient. 
> We are assuming that users of this feature are advanced and know how 
> direct I/O works and how to use it. I don’t know that we need to weigh 
> down the documentation with too many details.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Brian

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nio-dev/attachments/20170906/7efbc281/attachment-0001.html>