RFR: 8207851 JEP Draft: Support ByteBuffer mapped over non-volatile memory

Alan Bateman Alan.Bateman at oracle.com
Sun Sep 30 15:31:03 UTC 2018

On 26/09/2018 14:27, Andrew Dinn wrote:
> :
> I'm not clear why we should only use one flag. The two flags I specified
> reflect two independent use cases, one where data stored in an NVM
> device is accessed read-only and another where it is accessed
> read-write. Are you suggesting that the read-only case is redundant? I'm
> not sure I agree. For example, a utility which might want to review the
> state of persistent data while a service is off-line would really want
> to pass flag READ_ONLY_PERSISTENT. Of course, it could employ
> READ_WRITE_PERSISTENT (or equivalently, SYNC) and just not write the
> data but, mutatis mutandis, that same argument would remove the case for
> flag READ_ONLY.
I'm wrong on this point. The map takes a single MapMode, not a set of 
modes as I was assuming,  so you are right that it needs two new modes, 
not one. I do think we should re-visit the name though as the native 
flag is MAP_SYNC.


More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list