Howdy,
>From "Java theory and practice: Urban performance legends"
>(http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/library/j-jtp04223.html?ca=dnt-4
16):
I'd read that when it was posted: it's a good and interesting article.
Thank you for sending the link anyways. I agree with many of the points
made in
t;Shapira, Yoav" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
06/03/2003 03:52 PM
Please respond to "Jakarta Commons Developers List"
To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc:
Subject:RE: [COLLECTIONS] FastHashMap performance
Ho
uesday, June 03, 2003 3:37 PM
>To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
>Subject: Re: [COLLECTIONS] FastHashMap performance
>
>
>I have tried to implement performance tests for maps, but it is not
>trivial.
>Try to dissable GC and JIT for performance tests.
>
>- Origina
: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 9:05 PM
Subject: RE: [COLLECTIONS] FastHashMap performance
Howdy,
I've had tests with both a normal hashmap (just new HashMap() used) and
a synchronized wrapper (Collections.synchronizedMap(new HashMap()). I
would expect the normal HashMap to be faster than both
: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 9:05 PM
Subject: RE: [COLLECTIONS] FastHashMap performance
Howdy,
I've had tests with both a normal hashmap (just new HashMap() used) and
a synchronized wrapper (Collections.synchronizedMap(new HashMap()). I
would expect the normal HashMap to be faster than both the Fas
2003 2:58 PM
>To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
>Subject: RE: [COLLECTIONS] FastHashMap performance
>
>
>In your test, are you synchronizing the HashMap? FastHashMap
implements
>smart synchronization. It should not be compared with an
unsynchronized
>version of HashMap.
>
|
|To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
|
|cc:
|
|
