On Fri, 19 Nov 2021 05:07:23 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: > > adding the benchmark I have done some additional experiments as suggested by Claes, thanks, for different number of record components. In all cases all the components are of type `int` so they occupy only one slot. Here are some numbers. I tried with 0, 1, 10, 100 and 254 record components. Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units MyBenchmark.base avgt 4 0.775 ± 0.552 ns/op MyBenchmark.record0_toString avgt 4 4.973 ± 2.800 ns/op MyBenchmark.record1_toString avgt 4 16.026 ± 5.100 ns/op MyBenchmark.record10_toString avgt 4 81.412 ± 3.365 ns/op MyBenchmark.record100_toString avgt 4 12269.500 ± 179.784 ns/op MyBenchmark.record254_toString avgt 4 51191.953 ± 11679.762 ns/op MyBenchmark.valueClass0_toString avgt 4 5.134 ± 2.372 ns/op MyBenchmark.valueClass1_toString avgt 4 23.321 ± 9.234 ns/op MyBenchmark.valueClass10_toString avgt 4 94.048 ± 7.017 ns/op MyBenchmark.valueClass100_toString avgt 4 9253.282 ± 4843.738 ns/op MyBenchmark.valueClass254_toString avgt 4 31963.158 ± 24050.499 ns/op Then also after a suggestion from Claes I modified the maximum number of slots I would be chopping the arguments into, I gave a try with 20 slots and got these numbers: Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units MyBenchmark.record0_toString avgt 4 5.009 ± 3.454 ns/op MyBenchmark.record1_toString avgt 4 14.207 ± 10.551 ns/op MyBenchmark.record10_toString avgt 4 81.018 ± 7.320 ns/op MyBenchmark.record100_toString avgt 4 2862.641 ± 1233.862 ns/op MyBenchmark.record254_toString avgt 4 23002.280 ± 97103.923 ns/op MyBenchmark.valueClass0_toString avgt 4 4.967 ± 3.947 ns/op MyBenchmark.valueClass1_toString avgt 4 23.756 ± 8.499 ns/op MyBenchmark.valueClass10_toString avgt 4 87.691 ± 7.956 ns/op MyBenchmark.valueClass100_toString avgt 4 9539.272 ± 9461.516 ns/op MyBenchmark.valueClass254_toString avgt 4 28323.478 ± 11932.474 ns/op It seems like the execution is way faster now. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6403
