lukecwik commented on pull request #15176:
URL: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/15176#issuecomment-893697605
ArrayBlockingQueue was ~8% better than LinkedBlockingDeque and ~11% better
than LinkedBlockingQueue
Note that the stddev of the LinkedBlockingQueue is better but based upon
99.9% CI ArrayBlockingQueue outperforms the other two.
Here are the raw perf results using the
BeamFnLoggingClientBenchmark#testLogging
LinkedBlockingDeque:
```
Result
"org.apache.beam.fn.harness.logging.BeamFnLoggingClientBenchmark.testLogging":
221317.775 ±(99.9%) 4963.444 ops/s [Average]
(min, avg, max) = (211022.781, 221317.775, 230699.443), stdev = 6626.055
CI (99.9%): [216354.332, 226281.219] (assumes normal distribution)
```
LinkedBlockingQueue:
```
Result
"org.apache.beam.fn.harness.logging.BeamFnLoggingClientBenchmark.testLogging":
214444.765 ±(99.9%) 2042.514 ops/s [Average]
(min, avg, max) = (209158.045, 214444.765, 218078.984), stdev = 2726.698
CI (99.9%): [212402.251, 216487.280] (assumes normal distribution)
```
ArrayBlockingQueue:
```
Result
"org.apache.beam.fn.harness.logging.BeamFnLoggingClientBenchmark.testLogging":
239073.546 ±(99.9%) 10245.282 ops/s [Average]
(min, avg, max) = (213124.995, 239073.546, 259784.386), stdev = 13677.158
CI (99.9%): [228828.264, 249318.828] (assumes normal distribution)
```
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
