I'm using Trove for a large project currently. It's faster at times and
slower at others with the newest JDK. Overall though, if you can get away
with a primitive as the key, it works quite well. The licensing is a problem
though as it's GPL.
Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ming Fang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2007 11:09 AM
Subject: Re: 1000+ simultaneous connections with data transfer?
Has anyone try using the Trove HashMap implementation(http://
trove4j.sourceforge.net/)?
For some tests it is many times faster than the JDK one.
On Apr 21, 2007, at 9:58 AM, Richard Lowe wrote:
I found that HashMap lookups with this amount of packets can be
particularly expensive, as can creating byte arrays (even tiny ones). I
find that Mina session attributes are very useful. I know all of that
sounds obvious, but you'd be surprised how simple little operations can
stack up.
If you have to write a byte array to the IoHandler adapter, use
ByteBuffer.wrap(b) - this seems pretty fast.
I hope that might be useful for anybody else trying to do anything
similar!
Cheers,
Richard.
--
Trustin Lee wrote:
Additionally, did you try to turn on 'tcp no delay' option? (this
doesn't affect CPU utilization but might improve throughput)
((SocketSessionConfig) cfg.getSessionConfig()).setTcpNoDelay(true);
and... It would be nice to see your IoHandler implementation code.
HTH,
Trustin
