I almost forgot there are even old vs commons comparison. Stay tuned :) Twitter :http://www.twitter.com/m_cucchiara G+ :https://plus.google.com/107903711540963855921 Linkedin :http://www.linkedin.com/in/mauriziocucchiara
Maurizio Cucchiara On 22 October 2011 09:58, Maurizio Cucchiara <mcucchi...@apache.org> wrote: > Thank you Simo, > Ok, I realized after that the graph needs at least a short explanation: > In that test I have tried to test every caches which I re-engineered. > In the graph you mentioned, there are depicted 3 different kind of > cache implementations: > 1. Concurrent HashMap (CHM) > 2. Thread-safe HashMap (HM) > 3. Reentrant Read Write Lock (RRWL) > > As you will notice, there are some cases where RRWL is faster, other > where CHM and so on. > So there is no yet a real winner approach, though, at very quick look, > CHM seems to be the slower one (my guess is that it's the only > not-fully thread safe). > > To answer your question about projects merging, they surely could work > under the same project, my only concern is about the execution time. > At the moment I'm writing the whole execution time is near 50 seconds > (currently the non-benchmark side take more or less 20 seconds). > Furthermore the benchmark tests don't give you an answer in term of > correctness (aside from the concurrency issues), ATM the only > motivation behind them is performance measurement. > Next time I could check the hit/miss ratio. > Twitter :http://www.twitter.com/m_cucchiara > G+ :https://plus.google.com/107903711540963855921 > Linkedin :http://www.linkedin.com/in/mauriziocucchiara > > Maurizio Cucchiara >
