On Thu, 20 Jul 2023 01:11:43 GMT, Glavo wrote:
> The changes to `Arrays.hashCode(Object[])` in JDK-8312164 caused its
> performance is reduced by about 80%.
>
> This PR reverts this change.
With a size of `1`, the polymorphic version is not really polymorphic. This
seems to be about profile
On Thu, 20 Jul 2023 02:04:53 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>>> A similar performance decrease have been discussed here: [#14752
>>> (comment)](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/14752#discussion_r1250888931)
>>>
>>> Can you check whether adding `@ForceInline` on `Objects.equals` help with
>>> JIT?
On Thu, 20 Jul 2023 01:27:41 GMT, Glavo wrote:
>> The changes to `Arrays.hashCode(Object[])` in JDK-8312164 caused its
>> performance is reduced by about 80%.
>>
>> This PR reverts this change.
>
>> A similar performance decrease have been discussed here: [#14752
>>
On Thu, 20 Jul 2023 01:11:43 GMT, Glavo wrote:
> The changes to `Arrays.hashCode(Object[])` in JDK-8312164 caused its
> performance is reduced by about 80%.
>
> This PR reverts this change.
JMH Benchmark:
public class HashCode {
@Param({"1", "10", "100", "1"})
private int size;
The changes to `Arrays.hashCode(Object[])` in JDK-8312164 caused its
performance is reduced by about 80%.
This PR reverts this change.
-
Commit messages:
- Add benchmark
- Revert changes to Arrays.hashCode(Object[]) in JDK-8312164
Changes:
On Thu, 20 Jul 2023 01:11:43 GMT, Glavo wrote:
> The changes to `Arrays.hashCode(Object[])` in JDK-8312164 caused its
> performance is reduced by about 80%.
>
> This PR reverts this change.
A similar performance decrease have been discussed here:
