The current way to get location information is not garbage-free either, so this is not a problem.
Have you tried benchmarking this? I'm very curious! Sent from my iPhone > On 2016/05/12, at 2:06, 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]> >
