Hello Mister Nutter, the bzip2 has made a great leap today and now appears to be outperforming the Apache code. The critical change came when I realised that the blocksort code was always using the fallback sorts. So I fixed some bugs and that problem no longer appears to be true. Some rough timings:
a 2 MB jar files took under 2 seconds to bzip2, from the Apache code it looks like 8 seconds. A 45MB tar file takes about 45 seconds, Apache takes about 55. So it seems that performance wise, I no longer need to consider the Apache code a contender. Maybe we can boost things further? The fallback sorts are pretty much flattened: direct array access appear everywhere, method invocations are almost non-existent. I dislike this pattern, but the bytes really need to be churned as quickly as they can and methods even if they are compiled seem to add overhead. Ill have to think about this, maybe reverse the decision. leouser ____________________________________________________________________________________ Get your own web address. Have a HUGE year through Yahoo! Small Business. http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/domains/?p=BESTDEAL --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this list please visit: http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
