Hi Vladimir, Yes, I can make our results public of course. We have tested both implementations for RSA key generation, which is a mix of random prime generation and modular arithmetic (such as multiplicative inverse calculation). The testing platform was:
CPU: Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.26GHz Cache size: 512 KB Total Mem: 1035492 KB OS: Linux kernel 2.6.11-6mdk #1 JDK: SUN Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition (build 1.5.0_05-b05) JCE Provider: Bouncy Castle release 1.30 We obtained the following results for keys of length 512, 1024 and 2048 bits. The figures are the average of 20, 15 and 5 iterations respectively. HARMONY-39 512 bits: 231.22 ms 1024 bits: 3361.98 ms 2048 bits: 37620.38 ms HARMONY-199 512 bits: 149.05 ms 1024 bits: 1245.45 ms 2048 bits: 16826.24 ms We also tested encrytping and decrypting, but in that case there were no significative differences between the implementations. Regards, Daniel Fridlender On 4/20/06, Vladimir Gorr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > indeed it makes sense to compare the performance both implementations of > java.math package > using the real applications. If you have any results could you plase to make > them public? > I want to look at them. Besides I'd pefer to slightly correct you about the > SVN repository already contains full implemenation of the java.math package > for Java 1.5 (please look at the HARMONY-380 issue for details). > > Thanks, > Vladimir Gorr > Intel Middleware Products Division. > > > On 4/21/06, Daniel Fridlender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Dear all, > > > > on behalf of ITC I have updated our contribution of the package > > java.math including some recent optimizations (HARMONY-199). I think > > it would be interesting to compare our implementation with the one > > donated by Intel (HARMONY-39). In order to do that, it would be nice > > to have a collection of applications were the package is used. > > > > So far, we have tried both implementations with a realistic > > application (RSA key generation) and our implementation turned out to > > have a significantly better performance. > > > > Another point is that we implemented the full 1.5 API functionality, > > which in the case of BigDecimal amounts to having about twice as many > > methods as in the 1.4.2 API. This may have little significance now, > > but it will definitely be important when Harmony moves to 1.5 > > > > Our implementation uses 1.5 syntax since the 1.5 API includes an Enum > > (RoundingMode). > > It should be easy to obtain a 1.4.2 implementation of the 1.4.2 API from > > it. > > > > Some more information about our development can be found at > > http://www.fitc.unc.edu.ar/javadev/math/ > > > > Daniel Fridlender > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
