[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-3306?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14711559#comment-14711559
]
Evan Jones commented on THRIFT-3306:
------------------------------------
Happy to share my JMH benchmark code, but here are some results with a small
test object containing a few strings, a list of strings, one i64 and one bool.
Original, New Protocol/Transport: 896105.405 ±(99.9%) 2279.918 ops/s
Change, New Protocol/Transport: 952790.311 ±(99.9%) 3762.642 ops/s
Original, Reuse Protocol/Transport: 1333528.752 ±(99.9%) 5321.679 ops/s
Change, Reuse Protocol/Transport: 1339813.126 ±(99.9%) 5376.862 ops/s
Java version: 1.8.0_51
> Java: TBinaryProtocol: Use 1 temp buffer instead of allocating 8
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: THRIFT-3306
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-3306
> Project: Thrift
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Evan Jones
> Priority: Minor
>
> TBinaryProtocol has a member buffer for reading and for serializing each of
> the integer types. It can get by with only a single one: 8 bytes long for the
> maximum length integer. This causes a significant reduction in allocations
> and GC in cases that create the TBinaryProtocol to serialize a single
> message, instead of reusing it.
> This passes "ant test". I ran the existing SerializationBenchmark and there
> is no statistically significant difference (the average of 5 runs is smaller
> on my machine, but I don't think we should read much into that).
> I have a JMH benchmark for this, and it shows that when the TBinaryProtocol
> is allocated each time, this change is better, but is more or less the same
> when you reuse the TBinaryProtocol in a loop.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
