Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #8298
| Date | 2011-09-25 09:30 -0700 |
|---|---|
| From | Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? |
| References | (2 earlier) <9e8fplF19bU1@mid.individual.net> <j5n3qv$dbo$1@news.albasani.net> <9e8kdhF6lmU1@mid.individual.net> <j5ncco$hl$1@news.albasani.net> <j5ncqi$1hv$1@news.albasani.net> |
| Message-ID | <NvudnSfJfcOOyuLTnZ2dnUVZ_tadnZ2d@earthlink.com> (permalink) |
On 9/25/2011 7:11 AM, Jan Burse wrote:
> Jan Burse schrieb:
>> Currently I am planning to change the loop
>> to something like that:
>>
>> Bla[] bla = new Bla[n];
>> for (int i=0; i<n; i++) {
>> bla[i] = createBla();
>> }
>>
>> So that the JIT has less information on what
>> the loop is about, and to do some new
>> measurements. To be fair I would also use
>> createBla() in the lazy scenario. Lets see
>> what happens.
>
> Maybe there is a bug somewhere else in the
> application that leads to the performance loss.
> There are also points in the application where
> some of the bla elements are forcefully set
> to null so as to release Bla objects:
>
> ...
> bla[j] = null;
> ...
>
> I am not sure whether these releases work
> the same in the bulk and the lazy version of
> the code. Need to check first.
>
> So measurements have already shown that the
> release gives some gain, measurements where
> 16000 ms vs. 9600 ms. The release condition
> is more complicated than the lazy new
> condition, but the overhead is compensated
> the overall gain.
I don't think lazy initialization is at all a good idea, even if it made
performance better rather than worse, if there is any condition under
which an array element transitions from non-null to null.
Even if you can prove that the current design never causes
re-initialization, it would be a fragile design under subsequent changes.
Patricia
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-25 03:17 +0200
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-09-24 21:37 -0400
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-25 10:39 +0200
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-09-24 18:41 -0700
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-09-25 12:57 +0200
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-25 13:38 +0200
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-09-25 14:16 +0200
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-25 16:04 +0200
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-25 16:11 +0200
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-09-25 09:30 -0700
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-09-25 10:59 -0400
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-25 17:14 +0200
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-09-25 15:26 +0000
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-09-25 11:02 -0700
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-25 20:19 +0200
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-25 20:21 +0200
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-09-25 17:48 -0400
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-26 00:10 +0200
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-09-24 19:05 -0700
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-09-24 23:22 -0700
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-09-25 00:23 -0700
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-09-25 11:17 -0700
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-09-25 14:00 -0500
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-25 10:47 +0200
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-09-25 08:07 -0400
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-25 19:21 +0200
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-25 19:41 +0200
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-09-25 11:28 -0700
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-25 21:25 +0200
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-25 23:50 +0200
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-09-25 15:43 -0700
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-26 01:06 +0200
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-26 01:21 +0200
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-09-26 06:00 +0000
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-26 14:52 +0200
Re: Bulk Array Element Allocation, is it faster? Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-26 15:02 +0200
csiph-web