[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-2820?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13054399#comment-13054399 ]
Paul Loy commented on CASSANDRA-2820: ------------------------------------- oh no wait, they're protected...hmm, I'll give 2 alternatives. > Re-introduce FastByteArrayInputStream (and Output equivalent) > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CASSANDRA-2820 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-2820 > Project: Cassandra > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: Core > Affects Versions: 0.8.0 > Environment: n/a > Reporter: Paul Loy > Priority: Minor > Labels: bytearrayinputstream, bytearrayoutputstream, license, > synchronized > Attachments: fast_bytearray_iostreams_harmony-patch-2.txt > > > In https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-37 > FastByteArrayInputStream and FastByteArrayOutputStream were removed due to > being code copied from the JDK and then subsequently modified. The JDK > license is incompatible with Apache 2 license so the code had to go. > I have since had a look at the performance of the JDK ByteArrayInputStream > and a FastByteArrayInputStream (i.e. one with synchronized methods made > un-synchronized) and seen the difference is significant. > After a warmup-period of >10000 loops I get the following for 10000 loops > through a 128000 byte array: > bais : 3513ms > fbais: 72ms > This varies depending on the OS, machine and Java version, but it's always in > favour of the FastByteArrayInputStream as you might expect. > Then, at Jonathan Ellis' suggestion, I tried this using a modified Apache > Harmony ByteArrayInputStream - i.e. one whose license is compatible - and the > results were the same. A significant boost. > I will attach a patch with changes for the 0.8.0 tag. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira