This is the mail archive of the
java-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: [cp-patches] [PATCH] Fix PR classpath/24086, PR classpath/24091,PR classpath/24104 et al. ...
- From: David Daney <ddaney at avtrex dot com>
- To: Jeroen Frijters <jeroen at sumatra dot nl>
- Cc: Java Patch List <java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Classpath Patches <classpath-patches at gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 09:39:40 -0700
- Subject: Re: [cp-patches] [PATCH] Fix PR classpath/24086, PR classpath/24091,PR classpath/24104 et al. ...
- References: <D92197D0A6547B44A1567814F851FA680CB420@LEMBU.sumatrasoftware.com>
Jeroen Frijters wrote:
David Daney wrote:
LimitedLengthInputStream shouldn't have a finalize().
Let's consider the case where a client program did not read the entire
body of the response:
As implemented in the patch, the finalize is indeed needed to clean up
the mess and return the connection to the connection pool.
However I have been going back and forth on this matter, and now am of
the opinion that if a client does not read the entire body that the
connection should just be abandoned and not returned to the pool. Think
of the case where you only read a little bit from the head of a very
large response body. In this case do you want the runtime to read and
throw away the rest of the body (which could have unbounded size) just
so it can reuse the connection? I am starting to think not.
Opinions welcome, but I think I might get rid of the code that handles
this case.
OK to commit?
I vote yes.
Thanks for the vote, but what I really am looking for is official
permission.
David Daney