For the record, starting from now, OGNL Runtime has a new setCacheFactory method which allows the user to choose his preferred implementation.
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 12:27, Maurizio Cucchiara <mcucchi...@apache.org> wrote: > Apropos the idea of the maven profile is very good. > +1 and thank you. > > 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 12:24, Maurizio Cucchiara <mcucchi...@apache.org>wrote: > >> Sure you can, before that I should merge new branch with the current >> trunk. >> Further, FYI I have just submitted a patch for a small improvement >> http://issues.carrot2.org/browse/JUNITBENCH-40 >> >> 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 12:17, Simone Tripodi <simonetrip...@apache.org>wrote: >> >>> Hi Mau, >>> that for the explanation, that really helps on clarifying the graph!!! >>> >>> I have an idea about merging the tests in trunk with a profile >>> approach that I already submitted for the Disruptor project[1] - they >>> have performance/benchmark tests too - if it is fine for you I can >>> work on it - not today that's Rugby day, maybe tomorrow :) >>> >>> All the best and have a nice WE, >>> Simo >>> >>> [1] http://code.google.com/p/disruptor/issues/detail?id=2 >>> >>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ >>> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/ >>> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi >>> http://www.99soft.org/ >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 10:00 AM, Maurizio Cucchiara >>> <mcucchi...@apache.org> wrote: >>> > 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 >>> >> >>> > >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>> >>> >> >
