On Tue, 20 May 2025 19:32:54 GMT, Roger Riggs <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> This could remove the allocation by composing the high and low longs using
>>> shifts and binary operations and ng.next().
>>
>> do you mean to create the UUID using most and least significant bytes? if
>> so, I've tried out some variations, i found creating the 64 bit lsb with
>> ng.nextLong() brings a large pefomance decrease over using the nextBytes
>> method, but the below implemntation keeping with the nextByte(byte[]) api
>> brings a performance increase to 121.128 ± 30.486 ns/op, though the code
>> might appear a little roundabout.
>>
>>
>> public static UUID timestampUUID() {
>> long msTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
>> long nsTime = System.nanoTime();
>>
>> // Scale sub-ms nanoseconds to a 12-bit value
>> int nsBits = (int) ((nsTime % 1_000_000L) * 4096L / 1_000_000L);
>>
>> // Compose the 64 most significant bits: [48-bit msTime | 4-bit
>> version | 12-bit nsBits]
>> long mostSigBits =
>> ((msTime & 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFL) << 16) |
>> (0x7L << 12) |
>> nsBits;
>>
>> // Generate 8 random bytes for least significant bits
>> byte[] randomBytes = new byte[8];
>> SecureRandom ng = UUID.Holder.numberGenerator;
>> ng.nextBytes(randomBytes);
>>
>> long leastSigBits = 0;
>> for (int i = 0; i < 8; i++) {
>> leastSigBits = (leastSigBits << 8) | (randomBytes[i] & 0xFF);
>> }
>>
>> // Set variant (bits 62–63) to '10'
>> leastSigBits &= 0x3FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFL;
>> leastSigBits |= 0x8000000000000000L;
>>
>> return new UUID(mostSigBits, leastSigBits);
>> }
>
> There's no (time-based) relationship between the currentTimeMillis() value
> and the nanoTime value.
> They are independent clocks and are read separately and are un-correlated.
> They won't be usable as lsb of the millis value.
>
> I'm surprised that the `nextBytes` is slower, since it looks like it calls
> `nextLong` and puts it in a newly allocated byte[8]. Normal perf
> measurements won't account for the gc overhead to recover it.
>
> The nsBits computation looks odd, nanoTme returns nanoseconds (10^9), the
> remainder (% 1_000_000) is then milliseconds.
> if so, I've tried out some variations, i found creating the 64 bit lsb with
> ng.nextLong() brings a large pefomance decrease over using the nextBytes
> method
Probably because `SecureRandom` gets `#nextLong()` from `Random`, which ends up
calling `#next(int)` twice, so it allocates twice. Overriding `#nextLong()` in
`SecureRandom` may help a little but will still have to allocate as long as
`SecureRandomSpi` is not updated.
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25303#discussion_r2098727054
