Interesting.... but what this has todo with the Logger change? There
are no volatile fields, transient yes...
--jason
Adrian Brock wrote:
>Weird,
>
>I expected the volatile to make it run slower.
>The JVM has to check the reference to Category
>on every operation.
>
>hprof says this is true, but for some reason
>the method invoked through the Category takes less
>time?
>
>[pre]
>CPU TIME (ms) BEGIN (total = 41544) Wed Feb 27 13:42:01 2002
>rank self accum count trace method
> 1 19.96% 19.96% 2000000 51 org.apache.log4j.Category.debug (Wrapper)
> 2 19.48% 39.43% 2000000 40 org.apache.log4j.Category.debug (WrapperVolatile)
> 3 10.32% 49.75% 2000000 46 Vol$WrapperVolatile.debug
> 4 9.98% 59.73% 2000000 24 Vol$Wrapper.debug
> 5 9.35% 69.08% 2000000 44 org.apache.log4j.Category.getChainedPriority
>(Wrapper)
> 6 8.77% 77.85% 2000000 45 org.apache.log4j.Category.getChainedPriority
>(WrapperVolatile)
> 7 6.97% 84.82% 2000000 26 org.apache.log4j.Priority.isGreaterOrEqual
>(WrapperVolatile)
> 8 6.41% 91.23% 2000000 23 org.apache.log4j.Priority.isGreaterOrEqual (Wrapper)
>
>
>Wrapper : 45.70%
>WrapperVolatile : 44.98%
>[/pre]
>
>The volatile test is always quicker.
>There must be problem with my test program!
>
>[pre]
>import org.apache.log4j.Category;
>public class Vol
>{
> public static void main(String[] args)
> {
> org.apache.log4j.BasicConfigurator.configure();
>
> testWrapper();
> testVolatile();
> }
> public static void testWrapper()
> {
> long begin = 0;
> long end = 0;
>
> // If the JIT is going to optimize do it before the test
> Wrapper x = new Wrapper("test");
> for (int i=0; i < 1000000; i++)
> {
> x.debug("Hello");
> }
>
> // Run the non-volatile test
> begin = System.currentTimeMillis();
> for (int i=0; i < 100000000; i++)
> {
> x.debug("Hello");
> }
> end = System.currentTimeMillis();
> System.out.println("Wrapper: " + (end-begin));
> }
> public static void testVolatile()
> {
> long begin = 0;
> long end = 0;
>
> // If the JIT is going to optimize do it before the test
> WrapperVolatile v = new WrapperVolatile("test");
> for (int i=0; i < 1000000; i++)
> {
> v.debug("Hello");
> }
>
> // Run the volatile test
> begin = System.currentTimeMillis();
> for (int i=0; i < 100000000; i++)
> {
> v.debug("Hello");
> }
> end = System.currentTimeMillis();
> System.out.println("Volatile: " + (end-begin));
> }
> public static class Wrapper
> {
> private Category cat;
> public Wrapper(String name)
> {
> cat = Category.getInstance(name);
> cat.setPriority(org.apache.log4j.Priority.ERROR);
> }
> public void debug(String x)
> {
> cat.debug(x);
> }
> }
> public static class WrapperVolatile
> {
> private volatile Category cat;
> public WrapperVolatile(String name)
> {
> cat = Category.getInstance(name);
> cat.setPriority(org.apache.log4j.Priority.ERROR);
> }
> public void debug(String x)
> {
> cat.debug(x);
> }
> }
>}
>[/pre]
>Regards,
>Adrian
>
>>I did not mean to check this is. It is a
>>serializable Logger. I sent
>>email before about if there were any objections and
>>did not hear any.
>> Should I leave it or rollback?
>>
>>--jason
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Jboss-development mailing list
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-dev
>>lopment
>>
>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________
>View thread online: http://main.jboss.org/thread.jsp?forum=66&thread=9773
>
>_______________________________________________
>Jboss-development mailing list
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
>
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
