On 2/28/2011 1:38 PM, Peter wrote:
Hmm valuable insight into the future based on past experience.
Alternate code snippets sitting on the performance shelf need to be compilable
in their own right don't they?
But as you've mentioned, fastlist and its replacement, don't share a common
interface for testing.
We must test using a common api somewhere, such as the javaspace api, but that
risks duplicating identical code that might diverge over time causing
inaccurate test results. Divergence is expected as we evolve implementations.
I wrote a very simple wrapper interface that was equally smoothly
implemented on top of either of the FastList interfaces. For example, it
uses the visitor pattern which is neutral between the old and new ways
of scanning a list.
I would not benchmark a base utility through something as big and
complicated as the JavaSpace API. Especially on the relatively small
system I have for benchmarking, other issues could mask differences in
FastList speed. I also don't know enough about the performance
characteristics of the way the QA tests are connected to their servers
to include that in a benchmark of anything else.
Patricia
