Daniel, These results looks really cool!
Could you please add this data or a link to this thread to the corresponding issue? And I'll look into the issue and applly it. SY, Alexey 2006/11/7, Daniel Fridlender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hi Alexey, yes we often tested the speed in our several attempts to improve performance. Comparing modPow before and after this new patch gave us the following figures: size before after 16 5.636e+05 6.351e+05 32 9.727e+04 1.293e+05 48 3.225e+04 4.623e+04 64 1.436e+04 2.148e+04 128 1941 3114 192 590 970 256 252 420 384 75 127 512 32 55 where the first column shows the size of the arguments in bytes and the other two the number of modPow operations per 100 seconds before and after the patch. The method modPow is used in cryptography, we tested several cryptographic algorithms obtaining in all cases figures in favor of the optimized version (the one in the patch). For instance, for RSA key generation we obtained: size before after 512 3,00 2,06 1024 20,17 13,58 2048 280,38 149,48 where the first column shows the length of the key in bits and the other two the time in seconds taken to perform 30 iterations of the key generation algorithm before and after the patch. Thanks, Daniel On 11/3/06, Alexey Petrenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, Daniel. > > Great job! > > Have you made any performance testing to understand how much the patch > increases the speed of the methods? > > SY, Alexey > > 2006/11/3, Daniel Fridlender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Hi, > > > > We have submitted in http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-1981 > > an optimization of BigInteger methods modPow and pow. > > > > The optimization in modPow was achieved by introducing sliding windows > > instead of the square-and-multiply method. Some gain was obtained > > also from an optimized Montgomery multiplication used for computing > > squares. > > > > The method pow was optimized accordingly by improving the computation > > of squares. > > > > Thanks > > > > Daniel > > >
