How has it changed in the sub sections of the benchmark? Is it slower all around or only in encoding, decoding, or construction?
I recall that Specific became an IndexedRecord in this release, along with Generic. Maybe there is something going on there. In any event, I think there are significant opportunities to optimize left all around. I want to plug it in to a profiler and have a look, but won't have time to do so and act on my findings until May. I'd use a sampling profiler, as I have found them significantly more accurate (but less precise) than an instrumenting profiler. -Scott On Mar 1, 2010, at 4:03 PM, Doug Cutting wrote: > Don't know if folks have seen this benchmark: > > http://code.google.com/p/thrift-protobuf-compare/wiki/Benchmarking > > It's a micro benchmark of Java serialization systems. I just posted a > patch to update it to use Avro 1.3.0: > > http://code.google.com/p/thrift-protobuf-compare/issues/detail?id=23 > > Generic in 1.3.0 seems a bit faster than 1.2.0, but, unfortunately & > surprisingly, specific seems a bit slower than in 1.2.0. I think the > reason that generic is faster is perhaps the switch from a hashmap to an > array. But I would have thought other optimizations would have made > specific faster too, not slower. > > Any ideas? > > Doug
