I think it's actually LGPL. On 4/21/07, Michael Grundvig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
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 >> >
