[13] RFR JDK-7107615 "scalability bloker in javax.crypto.JceSecurity"

[Valerie Peng]

Thanks, we do have optimization in place for default providers bundled 
with JDK. But for 3rd party providers, provider verification may get 
complicated and recursive.

Thanks again for the comments/feedbacks,
Valerie
On 5/22/2019 3:20 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
> On 22/05/2019 01:02, Valerie Peng wrote:
>>
>> Well, I initially tried to use the computeIfAbsent, and I really like 
>> how the resulting code looks. But then as I checked the javadoc of 
>> the computeIfAbsent method, it seems that the provider verification 
>> code does not meet the criteria of short, simple requirement of the 
>> mapping func. In addition, the verification of 3rd party provider may 
>> trigger the verification of other providers which means updating the 
>> other mappings of the same map which the javadoc says the mapping 
>> func *must not* do. I don't know the internals of ConcurrentHashMap, 
>> would this possibly lead to a deadlock? So, I just followed the 
>> existing model of sync'ing on JceSecurity class. I didn't proceed 
>> with performance measuring of computeIfAbsent given the above reason.
> Fair enough, if it does indeed take a lot of time to compute then what 
> you have is okay.
>
> -Alan