This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.

Bug 20193 - Improve communication between FileSystems DataSystem
Summary: Improve communication between FileSystems DataSystem
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: platform
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Data Systems (show other bugs)
Version: 3.x
Hardware: PC Linux
: P3 blocker (vote)
Assignee: Jaroslav Tulach
URL:
Keywords: ARCH
Depends on: 20005
Blocks: 16389
  Show dependency tree
 
Reported: 2002-02-06 11:05 UTC by Jaroslav Tulach
Modified: 2008-12-22 17:54 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Issue Type: TASK
Exception Reporter:

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Jaroslav Tulach 2002-02-06 11:05:10 UTC 
The communication between filesystems and datasystems is based on listening on
filesystems events and by using FileSystem.AtomicAction in cases when data
system wants to prevent other parts of data system to update.

Neither is optimal - each data object has its own file object listener (at least
one) and even FileSystem.AtomicAction does not work exactly as expected - one
still has to count with fs & ds getting out of sync.

The goal is to reduce number of listeners and improve the "atomic" behaviour.
Comment 1 Petr Nejedly 2002-05-14 11:39:18 UTC 
Partially fixed - implemented the FS listener in DataObjectPool
and removed the listeners from DataObject/MultiDataObject.
Comment 2 Marian Mirilovic 2003-03-13 13:43:43 UTC 
Changed owner David S. -> David K.
Comment 3 David Konecny 2003-04-30 15:38:47 UTC 
Changing TM to FUTURE for several DataSystem enhancements. The DS are planned
for rewrite and so it does not make sense to invest time into these
enhancements. If you think the issue is important and should be fixed for 4.0
then feel free to let me know. I'm open to change the plan.
Comment 4 Jaroslav Tulach 2005-02-06 18:11:47 UTC 
Unlikely someone would really want to work in this extensively right 
now.