On Mon, 26 Jul 2021 20:45:14 GMT, Markus KARG 
<github.com+1701815+mk...@openjdk.org> wrote:

>> This PR-*draft* is **work in progress** and an invitation to discuss a 
>> possible solution for issue 
>> [JDK-8265891](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8265891). It is *not 
>> yet* intended for a final review.
>> 
>> As proposed in JDK-8265891, this PR provides an implementation for 
>> `Channels.newInputStream().transferTo()` which provide superior performance 
>> compared to the current implementation. The changes are:
>> * Prevents transfers through the JVM heap as much as possibly by offloading 
>> to deeper levels via NIO, hence allowing the operating system to optimize 
>> the transfer.
>> * Using more JRE heap in the fallback case when no NIO is possible (still 
>> only KiBs, hence mostl ynegligible even on SBCs) to better perform on modern 
>> hardware / fast I/O devides.
>> 
>> Using JMH I have benchmarked both, the original implementation and this 
>> implementation, and (depending on the used hardware and use case) 
>> performance change was approx. doubled performance. So this PoC proofs that 
>> it makes sense to finalize this work and turn it into an actual OpenJDK 
>> contribution. 
>> 
>> I encourage everybody to discuss this draft:
>> * Are there valid arguments for *not* doing this change?
>> * Is there a *better* way to improve performance of 
>> `Channels.newInputStream().transferTo()`?
>> * How to go on from here: What is missing to get this ready for an actual 
>> review?
>
> Markus KARG has refreshed the contents of this pull request, and previous 
> commits have been removed. The incremental views will show differences 
> compared to the previous content of the PR.

src/java.base/share/classes/sun/nio/ch/ChannelOutputStream.java line 85:

> 83:     private byte[] bs;       // Invoker's previous array
> 84:     private byte[] b1;
> 85: 

It might be better to put the field declarations at the beginning of the class 
before the static methods.

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/4263

Reply via email to