Oops, I'm not as fast as you two, writing in english. :-(
-Ulf
Am 26.06.2009 18:04, Martin Buchholz schrieb:
Removing one layer of BufferedInputStream
in my change saves one bulk copy per file.
And reusing the same buffer saves on cache misses
and GC. But bulk copy is actually very fast,
(especially as memory is becoming more like disk),
so the win is relatively small.
I would be surprised if you could get more than
the 10-20% that I've gotten with this change,
by using direct buffers.
Martin
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 08:47, Xueming Shen <xueming.s...@sun.com
<mailto:xueming.s...@sun.com>> wrote:
I do have a "prototype implementation" that uses buffer based
read/write on Jar/ZipFile, it
is not that "much" faster as you would have expected (basically
the gain of using direct buffer
comes from saving one or two memory copy of the content, which is
very faster, compared to
the "real hard" work of moving bits from harddisk to memory).
While it's still something
worth doing, but definitely not a high priority for now, yes,
it's on the list.
Sherman
