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
