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

List:       openjdk-serviceability-dev
Subject:    Re: RFR: JDK-8327769: jcmd GC.heap_dump without options should write to location given by -XX:HeapDu
From:       Chris Plummer <cjplummer () openjdk ! org>
Date:       2024-03-29 4:17:41
Message-ID: jXp9C900RJWni3Vx_e8h3d1tvim1E3Vs5i53FWO8g1E=.0c0f9f2a-4c6e-42a1-ac19-227a4344f805 () github ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:08:27 GMT, Matthias Baesken <mbaesken@openjdk.org> wrote:

> Yes it is some work on documentation (but seems some doc work needs to be done \
> anyway because it was forgotten when `HeapDumpGzipLevel` was introduced).

That currently only impacts 3 documents. Having HeapDumpGzipLevel apply to the jcmd \
impacts 4 more, and if it doesn't apply to the jcmd then you have an inconsistency \
with how HeapDumpXXX options are applied.

There's also a question of whether currently missing doc updates for \
HeapDumpGzipLevel should be made part of this PR because it complicates back porting. \
We need to make sure we don't backport HeapDumpGzipLevel changes to a JDK version \
that has HeapDumpPath but not HeapDumpGzipLevel. I think as of right now HeapDumpPath \
is in 11 but HeapDumpGzipLevel is only backported to 17.

> And the current name is generic and does not mention the OOM case in the name \
> itself, the current implementation would better match the name if it was \
> `HeapDumpPathOnOom` or something like this.

There's still the question of whether or not it is even appropriate to have -XX \
options taking the place of jcmd options.

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18190#issuecomment-2026620689


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