Raymond,

I would expect  iterating through BundleContext.getBundles() every time to
be quite expensive compared to maintaining a set of bundles, updated using a
listener (we already do this in modules/osgi-runtime to maintain a thread
context classloader, and this used to be the way we did service discovery
for OSGi).


On 8/29/08, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Can you help a bit on the poor-man's profiling? In the class of
> org.apache.tuscany.sca.extensibility.osgi.OSGiServiceDiscoverer and
> org.apache.tuscany.sca.extensibility.osgi.OSGiServiceDiscoverer.ClassLoaderImpl,
> there are API calls such as:
>
> BundleContext.getBundles()
> Bundle.getEntry(...)
> Bundle.findEntries(...)
>
> It would be really helpful if you can give us some rough ideas around these
> potential bottlenecks.
>
> Thanks,
> Raymond
>
> From: Rajini Sivaram
> Sent: Friday, August 29, 2008 7:50 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Performance of extensibility-osgi
>
>
>
> I think there is a very big classloading performance issue with
> extensibility-osgi. Running itest/osgi-tuscany/osgi-tuscany-test takes three
> times as much time using the ServiceDiscoverer  in extensibility-osgi
> compared to using the standard Classloader based ServiceDiscoverer using the
> BundleClassloader as we used to.
>
> With the current build of Tuscany on my thinkpad:
>
> Using extensibility-osgi
>   [INFO] Apache Tuscany OSGi-Based Tuscany Runtime Tests ....... SUCCESS
> [14:09.609s]
> The same build without extensibility-osgi (with BundleClassloader as TCCL)
>  [INFO] Apache Tuscany OSGi-Based Tuscany Runtime Tests ....... SUCCESS
> [3:54.796s]
>
>
> These figures show around 10 minutes extra execution time, attributed
> purely to classloading differences. Even though these tests show a
> worst-case scenario since there is an awful lot of classloading going on
> here with Tuscany being loaded many times, I think we should address this
> because the impact is significant.
>
>
> Thank you...
>
> Regards,
>
> Rajini
>



-- 
Thank you...

Regards,

Rajini

Reply via email to