How would we do that while still making log4j compatible with 1.7 and 1.8?

On 11 May 2016 at 12:06, Ralph Goers <[email protected]> wrote:

> For those you not following the OpenJDK mailing list, Mandy is
> recommending we do
>
> walker.walk(s -> s.skip(2).findFirst());
>
> in every logger method to capture the stack frame information. We might
> have to call it twice to get the Class as well. This will probably break
> the garbage free tests and it might incur more overhead then is acceptable.
> We will have to do some testing to find out.
>
> Ralph
>
>
>
> On May 10, 2016, at 10:41 AM, Ralph Goers <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> We don’t use that for getting the caller location. We only use the
> throwable. You are thinking of the code that needs to get the caller’s
> Class object.
>
> Ralph
>
> On May 10, 2016, at 10:33 AM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> JDK 9 should be blocking the sun.reflect classes which means we fall back
> to SecurityManager or Throwable depending on the method.
>
> On 10 May 2016 at 11:51, Ralph Goers <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I just responded to that thread with the results below.  I was hoping we
>> wouldn’t need to use the StackWalker API.  Now I am wondering if it is any
>> faster. My initial tests showed it was much faster than using the
>> Throwable, but that doesn’t mean much if that is now slower.
>>
>> Ralph
>>
>> On May 10, 2016, at 9:47 AM, Ralph Goers <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> No. On the openjdk list Mandy said that walking the Throwable as we are
>> doing should be faster due to improvements made in JDK-8150778.
>>
>> Ralph
>>
>> On May 10, 2016, at 9:21 AM, Paul Benedict <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Are you using the new JDK 9 APIs to walk the stack?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Paul
>>
>> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Ralph Goers <[email protected]
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Supposedly Java 9 was supposed to improve the performance of walking the
>>> stack trace. However, the numbers I get below indicate to me that they are
>>> moving in the opposite direction.  Am I misreading this?
>>>
>>> Ralph
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> java version "1.7.0_80
>>>
>>> Benchmark
>>>   Mode  Samples       Score      Error  Units
>>> o.a.l.l.p.j.AsyncAppenderLog4j2LocationBenchmark.throughputSimple
>>>   thrpt       20  124819.285 ± 3003.918  ops/s
>>>
>>> java version "1.8.0_65"
>>>
>>> Benchmark
>>>   Mode  Samples       Score      Error  Units
>>> o.a.l.l.p.j.AsyncAppenderLog4j2LocationBenchmark.throughputSimple
>>>   thrpt       20  123209.746 ± 3064.672  ops/s
>>>
>>>
>>> java version "9-ea"
>>> Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 9-ea+116)
>>>
>>> Benchmark
>>>   Mode  Samples      Score      Error  Units
>>> o.a.l.l.p.j.AsyncAppenderLog4j2LocationBenchmark.throughputSimple
>>>   thrpt       20  96090.261 ± 4565.763  ops/s
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Matt Sicker <[email protected]>

Reply via email to