On Wed, 17 Nov 2021 22:00:30 GMT, Vicente Romero <vrom...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Please review this PR which aims to optimize the implementation of the >> `toString` method we provide for records. A benchmark comparing the >> implementation we are providing for records with lombok found out that >> lombok is much faster mainly because our implementation uses >> `String::format`. This fix is basically delegating on >> StringConcatFactory::makeConcatWithConstants which is faster. >> >> TIA >> >> This is the result of the benchmark comparing records to lombok with vanilla >> JDK: >> >> Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units >> MyBenchmark.base avgt 4 0.849 ± 0.111 ns/op >> MyBenchmark.equals_record avgt 4 7.343 ± 2.740 ns/op >> MyBenchmark.equals_value avgt 4 6.644 ± 1.920 ns/op >> MyBenchmark.record_hash_code avgt 4 5.763 ± 3.882 ns/op >> MyBenchmark.record_to_string avgt 4 262.626 ± 12.574 ns/op >> <------ Before >> MyBenchmark.value_class_to_string avgt 4 30.325 ± 21.389 ns/op >> MyBenchmark.value_hash_code avgt 4 5.048 ± 3.936 ns/op >> >> >> after this patch: >> >> Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units >> MyBenchmark.base avgt 4 0.680 ± 0.185 ns/op >> MyBenchmark.equals_record avgt 4 5.599 ± 1.348 ns/op >> MyBenchmark.equals_value avgt 4 5.718 ± 4.633 ns/op >> MyBenchmark.record_hash_code avgt 4 4.628 ± 4.368 ns/op >> MyBenchmark.record_to_string avgt 4 26.791 ± 1.817 ns/op >> <------- After >> MyBenchmark.value_class_to_string avgt 4 35.473 ± 2.626 ns/op >> MyBenchmark.value_hash_code avgt 4 6.152 ± 5.101 ns/op > > Vicente Romero has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > addressing review comments I have uploaded another iteration, some numbers for when the number of record components is pushed to the maximum (254 components): JDK18 vanilla: Before: Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units MyBenchmark.base avgt 4 0.670 ± 0.078 ns/op MyBenchmark.equals_record avgt 4 9092.649 ± 400.200 ns/op MyBenchmark.equals_value avgt 4 107.184 ± 15.993 ns/op MyBenchmark.record_hash_code avgt 4 6284.711 ± 1985.212 ns/op MyBenchmark.record_to_string avgt 4 69614.364 ± 6310.593 ns/op MyBenchmark.value_class_to_string avgt 4 25910.041 ± 7822.274 ns/op MyBenchmark.value_hash_code avgt 4 315.969 ± 36.545 ns/op With this PR: Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units MyBenchmark.base avgt 4 0.658 ± 0.053 ns/op MyBenchmark.equals_record avgt 4 8222.407 ± 308.440 ns/op MyBenchmark.equals_value avgt 4 102.627 ± 56.522 ns/op MyBenchmark.record_hash_code avgt 4 6030.478 ± 243.390 ns/op MyBenchmark.record_to_string avgt 4 46504.151 ± 3597.182 ns/op MyBenchmark.value_class_to_string avgt 4 26196.565 ± 8154.037 ns/op MyBenchmark.value_hash_code avgt 4 313.918 ± 4.577 ns/op some observations, we are doing better than before but still worst than lombok. I don't think having to create a more complicated MH tree is the key, our numbers are still worst even if there is no need to create too much levels in the MH tree like for 100 record components occupying a spot each. Another observation is that even though our slowest implementation is the one for the `toString` method, in absolute terms, lombok is faster in all cases. So more work could be necessary for the rest of the methods if deemed worthy. Thanks! ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6403
