[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7966?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16167969#comment-16167969
]
Adrien Grand commented on LUCENE-7966:
--------------------------------------
I did some tests with the Calgary corpus that can be found at
http://corpus.canterbury.ac.nz/descriptions/ (lower is better):
|| File || Time to compress without patch || Time to compress with the patch
||Difference ||
| bib | 971702 | 904173 | -6.9% |
| book1 | 7479794 | 7073712 | -5.4% |
| book2 | 4990347 | 4574486 | -8.3% |
| geo | 1600972 | 1574435 | -1.7% |
| news | 3394833 | 3222113 | -5.1% |
| obj1 | 169516 | 166673 | -1.7% |
| obj2 | 1869442 | 1769302 | -5.4% |
| paper1 | 385900 | 357472 | -7.4% |
| pic | 1528354 | 1314336 | -14% |
| progc | 279295 | 261445 | -6.4% |
| progl | 410565 |376898 | -8.2% |
| progp | 245654 | 222230 | -9.5% |
| trans | 517571 | 470134 | -9.2% |
As expected the improvement is better on files that have long repetitions like
source code and the bitmap picture. The speedup is constantly reproducible.
> build mr-jar and use some java 9 methods if available
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-7966
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7966
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: general/build
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Attachments: LUCENE-7966.patch, LUCENE-7966.patch, LUCENE-7966.patch,
> LUCENE-7966.patch, LUCENE-7966.patch
>
>
> See background: http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/238
> It would be nice to use some of the newer array methods and range checking
> methods in java 9 for example, without waiting for lucene 10 or something. If
> we build an MR-jar, we can start migrating our code to use java 9 methods
> right now, it will use optimized methods from java 9 when thats available,
> otherwise fall back to java 8 code.
> This patch adds:
> {code}
> Objects.checkIndex(int,int)
> Objects.checkFromToIndex(int,int,int)
> Objects.checkFromIndexSize(int,int,int)
> Arrays.mismatch(byte[],int,int,byte[],int,int)
> Arrays.compareUnsigned(byte[],int,int,byte[],int,int)
> Arrays.equal(byte[],int,int,byte[],int,int)
> // did not add char/int/long/short/etc but of course its possible if needed
> {code}
> It sets these up in {{org.apache.lucene.future}} as 1-1 mappings to java
> methods. This way, we can simply directly replace call sites with java 9
> methods when java 9 is a minimum. Simple 1-1 mappings mean also that we only
> have to worry about testing that our java 8 fallback methods work.
> I found that many of the current byte array methods today are willy-nilly and
> very lenient for example, passing invalid offsets at times and relying on
> compare methods not throwing exceptions, etc. I fixed all the instances in
> core/codecs but have not looked at the problems with AnalyzingSuggester. Also
> SimpleText still uses a silly method in ArrayUtil in similar crazy way, have
> not removed that one yet.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
