[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       openjdk-serviceability-dev
Subject:    Re: [Discussion] Expected behavior of combining "all" and "live" options of jmap(Internet mail)
From:       linzang(臧琳) <linzang () tencent ! com>
Date:       2020-08-20 12:18:10
Message-ID: 258fb4cee0564eefb66b83bd6a74a8ae () tencent ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Thanks Paul!
    I have filed CSR and Bug:
    CSR: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8252102
    Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8252101

    Patch is under testing,  will create  RFR thread when it is ready. 
Thanks!

Cheers,
Lin

On 20/08/2020 04:18, Hohensee, Paul wrote:
> I prioritize compatibility, so would go with option 2.
> 
> Thanks,
> Paul
> 
> On 8/18/20, 11:17 PM, "serviceability-dev on behalf of linzang(臧琳)" \
> <serviceability-dev-retn@openjdk.java.net on behalf of linzang@tencent.com> wrote: 
> Dear All,
> May I get some suggestions?  so that I can  work out a patch
> base on that.
> Or may be it should not be treated as an issue?
> BRs,
> Lin
> 
> On 17/08/2020 17:17, linzang(臧琳) wrote:
> > Dear all,
> > we found the jmap's histo/dump command could accept "live" and "all" options \
> > together, and the specification does not describe what is the expected behavior \
> > of it. I have tried that when these two options used together, the "live" takes \
> > effect, no matter what sequences are they in commandline. IMO, it is a little \
> > confused to use "live" and "all" together, and if it is allowed, the \
> > specification may need to be updated to state the behavior clearly. Therefore may \
> > I ask your suggestion on which option of the following is prefered: (option 1.)  \
> > disallow using these two options together, I think this is more clear, but I am \
> > not sure whether there is backward compatibility risk. (option 2.)  allow the \
> > combination use of "live" and "all", and update the specification to clearly \
> > describe the behavior that "live" takes effect in this case. What do you think?
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Lin
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]