On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 19:00:59 +0200
Julien Vermillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 09:52:38 -0700
> "Sangjin Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > Forgot to add that this is a pretty crucial method.  Any text based
> > decoder would need to use it to decode messages...  Thanks!
> > Sangjin
> > 
> > On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 9:51 AM, Sangjin Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > I've been looking at some performance characteristics of
> > > ByteBuffer.getString() in 1.1.x, and noticed that it is
> > > considerably slower than its NIO counterpart.  I tested it with a
> > > few JVMs, and ByteBuffer.getString() performs anywhere between 3 -
> > > 5 times poorer than the NIO version.  NIO does not have the
> > > getString() method, and one would use CharsetDecoder.decode().
> > > I also checked the trunk version (IoBuffer.getString()), and it
> > > seems much faster and pretty close to the NIO performance.
> > >
> > > How is a performance issue with 1.1.x like this normally handled?
> > > Are we open to investigate and fix performance problems like this
> > > in 1.1.x as long as it does not entail API changes?  If a simple
> > > change for IoBuffer resulted in this performance enhancement,
> > > perhaps we can backport that change?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Sangjin
> > >
> > >
> 
> Hi Sangjin,
> 
> I don't see any problem in patching 1.X for perfs. It's some kind of
> bugfix ;)
> 
> Julien

Perhaps you will be forced to do the 1.X release process too :D

Julien

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to