Re: [javagroups-users] Does jgroups create too many objects when sending ?

[Bela B. <be...@ya...>]

I suggest you implement your own marshalling / unmarshalling for 
ReplicatedCacheMessage, and give the resulting byte[] buffer to JGroups 
rather than
the object. Obviously you can't avoid using serialization for keys and 
values, but ReplicatedCacheMessage doesn't need to use it.

Sergio Oliveira wrote:

> Hi List,
>  
> This is my first post to the list.
>  
> I am implementing a fully replicated cache with JGroups.
>  
> I am wondering what happens behind the scenes when I do this:
>  
>     protected synchronized Object put(Object key, Object value, 
> boolean send) {
>         Object obj = cache.put(key, value);
>         if (send) {
>             try {
>                 ReplicatedCacheMessage msg = new 
> ReplicatedCacheMessage( ReplicatedCacheMessage.PUT, 
> (java.io.Serializable) key, (java.io.Serializable) value);
>                 channel.send(null, null, msg);
>             } catch(Exception e) {
>                 e.printStackTrace();
>             }
>         }
>         return obj;
>     }
>  
> I am probably creating too many objects here and the GC will go nuts 
> under heavy loads.
>  
> I should probably create a ByteBuffer or a pool of objects, however I 
> must know wheter channel.send is asynchronous or not, meaning, when 
> channel.send() returns, am I free to use the message object again 
> right away ?
>  
> Have anyone here developed a session replication mechanism for a big 
> website with many machines in load balance ?
>  
> Sergio


-- 
Bela Ban
Lead JGroups / JBossCache
callto://belaban