[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1607?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12700604#action_12700604
]
Earwin Burrfoot commented on LUCENE-1607:
-----------------------------------------
bq. What was the field count? Is it still a considerable speedup with hundreds
of fields without slowing anything else down ?
The field count was 1 :) I rewrote the benchmark, with extra code Java6 speedup
on single already interned field became 12.5x.
Results for three java varieties, and different sets of keys follow:
Java 6 (64, server):
1 key
interned 12.47x
uninterned 3.76x
10 keys
interned 8.03x
uninterned 3.08x
100 keys
interned 6.58x
uninterned 2.55x
1000 keys
interned 5.39x
uninterned 2.69x
Java 5 (64, server):
1 key
interned 9.84x
uninterned 5.03x
10 keys
interned 7.00x
uninterned 4.61x
100 keys
interned 6.61x
uninterned 2.28x
1000 keys
interned 4.73x
uninterned 2.73x
Java 4 (32, client):
1 key
interned 4.90x
uninterned 2.88x
10 keys
interned 4.08x
uninterned 2.67x
100 keys
interned 3.88x
uninterned 2.52x
1000 keys
interned 3.44x
uninterned 2.31x
> String.intern() faster alternative
> ----------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-1607
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1607
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Earwin Burrfoot
> Fix For: 2.9
>
> Attachments: intern.patch, LUCENE-1607.patch
>
>
> By using our own interned string pool on top of default, String.intern() can
> be greatly optimized.
> On my setup (java 6) this alternative runs ~15.8x faster for already interned
> strings, and ~2.2x faster for 'new String(interned)'
> For java 5 and 4 speedup is lower, but still considerable.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
