Skip to main content

[jsr356-experts] Re: RemoteEndpoint setAutoFlush() and flush()

  • From: Scott Ferguson < >
  • To:
  • Subject: [jsr356-experts] Re: RemoteEndpoint setAutoFlush() and flush()
  • Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 12:11:07 -0800

On 11/29/12 11:34 AM, Danny Coward wrote:
" type="cite">
My apologies Scott, I must have missed your original request - I've logged this as issue 63.


" type="cite">

So auto flush true would require the implementation never keep anything in a send buffer, false would allow it ?

Not quite. It's more like auto-flush false means "I'm batching messages; don't bother sending if you don't have to." I don't think the wording should be "never", because of things like mux, or other server heuristics. It's more like "start the process of sending."

setBatching(true) might be a better name, if that's clearer.

When setBatching(false) [autoFlush=true] -- the default --  and an app calls sendString(), the message will be delivered (with possible buffering, delays, mux, optimizations, etc, depending on the implementation, but it will be delivered without further intervention from the app.)

When setBatching(true) [autoFlush=false], and an app calls sendString(), the message might sit in the buffer forever until the application calls flush().

sendPartialString would be unaffected by the flag; the WS implementation is free to do whatever it wants with partial messages.

Basically, it's a hint: setBatching(true) [autoFlush=false] means "I'm batching a bunch of messages, so don't bother sending the data if you don't need to until I call flush."

Does that make sense? I don't want to over-constrain implementations with autoFlush(true) either option. Maybe "batching" is the better name to avoid confusion. (But even batching=true doesn't require buffering. Implementations can still send fragments early if they want or even ignore batching=true.)
" type="cite">

It seems like a reasonable request - do you think the autoflush property is a per-peer setting / per logical endpoint / per container setting ? I'm wondering if typically developers will want to set this once per application rather than keep setting it per RemoteEndpoint.

I think it's on the RemoteEndpoint, like setAutoCommit for JDBC. It's easy to set in @WebSocketOpen, and the application might want to start and stop batching mode while processing.

-- Scott

" type="cite">

- Danny

On 11/28/12 3:28 PM, Scott Ferguson wrote:
" type="cite">
I'd like a setAutoFlush() and flush() on RemoteEndpoint for high performance messaging. Defaults to true, which is the current behavior.

The performance difference is on the order of 5-7 times as many messages in some early micro-benchmarks. It's a big improvement and puts us near the high-speed messaging like ZeroQ.

Danny Coward
Java EE
Oracle Corporation

[jsr356-experts] RemoteEndpoint setAutoFlush() and flush()

Scott Ferguson 11/28/2012

[jsr356-experts] RemoteEndpoint setAutoFlush() and flush()

Danny Coward 11/29/2012

[jsr356-experts] Re: RemoteEndpoint setAutoFlush() and flush()

Scott Ferguson 11/29/2012
Please Confirm