dev@grizzly.java.net

Re: Question for those developing custom Filters

From: Bongjae Chang <bongjae.chang_at_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 11:24:26 +0900

Hi Ryan,

I only used the EchoFilter for testing basic performance of Grizzly with
others.

But I also think that it is unnecessary for the core framework to include
them.

I think it is better for "samples" packages to have them.

Thanks.

Regards,
Bongjae Chang

From: Matthew Swift <matthew.swift_at_gmail.com>
Reply-To: <dev_at_grizzly.java.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 22:13:04 +0100
To: <dev_at_grizzly.java.net>
Subject: Re: Question for those developing custom Filters

Hi Ryan,

We've not used these filters for testing, although in hindsight I can see
how they would have been useful. For me I found them particularly useful as
examples, illustrating how to use Grizzly, and in addition to the other
samples that you already have.

To summarize, judging from their size they don't look like they'll bloat
Grizzly too much, but there's probably no harm in moving them out to
somewhere else (perhaps a new unit testing support module?).

Although they're not big, the things that irk me are the JMX support and the
dependency on gmbal. It would be nice if the JMX support was optional - I
may want it in a server, but I almost certainly don't want it in a client.

Matt


On 21 February 2012 18:43, Ryan Lubke <ryan.lubke_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey Folks,
>
> I'm curious (I hope Matt and Bongjae are paying attention): when testing your
> custom Filter implementations do you use one or more of the following Filters
> from the core framework?
>
> - DelayFilter
> - ChunkingFilter
> - EchoFilter
>
> I ask as we're looking at ways to reduce the core framework jar size. If
> you've found these Filters to be useful in your development, I'm more inclined
> to say that we leave them where they are. If no-one really knew about these,
> then I'd bet it's safe to say that we can move them.
>
> -rl