Cool, Thanks a lot!
Leon
From: alexan...@kriegisch.name
To: aspectj-users@eclipse.org
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 11:18:48 +0200
Subject: Re: [aspectj-users] Runtime performance against different weaving
options
Hi Leon.
In general, CTW and PCTW should be the same in performance because you just
have normal classloading plus aspectjrt.jar. Only for LTW you have a
warm-up phase because aspect weaving needs to be done during classloading.
This is why you need the weaving agent (aspectjweaver.jar which also includes
the runtime) on the command line. So LTW is a bit slower at the beginning,
afterwards the three methods should have identical performance. Either way
runtime performance will be significantly faster (not mentioning more
powerful) than with proxy-based AOP approaches like Spring AOP which involves
Java Dynamic Proxies and/or CGLIB proxies.
Regards
--
Alexander Kriegisch
http://scrum-master.de
马leon schrieb am 04.06.2014 11:10:
I know there're 3 ways to weaving: compile-time, post compile time and
load-time
I'd like to know is there any performance comparison for above 3 ways.
By performance, I mean all classes have been loaded and the server gets
warm-up for some time.
___
aspectj-users mailing list
aspectj-users@eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
___
aspectj-users mailing list
aspectj-users@eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
