On May 6, 2006, at 3:40 AM, karl wettin wrote:
On Sat, 2006-05-06 at 03:28 -0400, Erik Hatcher wrote:
On May 6, 2006, at 2:29 AM, karl wettin wrote:
There are a couple of Vector:s in the code. Is it really
necessary to
use this expensive thread safe artifact from the dark ages?
+1
Does anyone have any numbers on the performance differences on such a
refactoring? I reckon it wouldn't be that hard to put together a
reasonably representative dataset and test before/after. Who's game?
I'm already at it, but in my branch. Can patch up the SVN version with
my changes. I'll leave the test to someone else :)
The question is what needs and not needs to be synchronized. I take it
nothing needs to, but I'm not sure.
Well, we used to have this hot shot committer named Brian Goetz, but
he's too busy being an expert on synchronization and low-level Java
details that personally make my head hurt. Maybe he could find it an
interesting case study to do a little nuts and bolts analysis of the
Lucene codebase and see what tweaks make sense and just get a test
suite going to hammer it on all our before/after scenarios.
Whatcha think, Brian?! :)
Erik
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
