I just responded to that thread with the results below. I was hoping we wouldn’t need to use the StackWalker API. Now I am wondering if it is any faster. My initial tests showed it was much faster than using the Throwable, but that doesn’t mean much if that is now slower.
Ralph > On May 10, 2016, at 9:47 AM, Ralph Goers <[email protected]> wrote: > > No. On the openjdk list Mandy said that walking the Throwable as we are doing > should be faster due to improvements made in JDK-8150778. > > Ralph > >> On May 10, 2016, at 9:21 AM, Paul Benedict <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Are you using the new JDK 9 APIs to walk the stack? >> >> Cheers, >> Paul >> >> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Ralph Goers <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> Supposedly Java 9 was supposed to improve the performance of walking the >> stack trace. However, the numbers I get below indicate to me that they are >> moving in the opposite direction. Am I misreading this? >> >> Ralph >> >> >> >> java version "1.7.0_80 >> >> Benchmark Mode >> Samples Score Error Units >> o.a.l.l.p.j.AsyncAppenderLog4j2LocationBenchmark.throughputSimple thrpt >> 20 124819.285 ± 3003.918 ops/s >> >> java version "1.8.0_65" >> >> Benchmark Mode >> Samples Score Error Units >> o.a.l.l.p.j.AsyncAppenderLog4j2LocationBenchmark.throughputSimple thrpt >> 20 123209.746 ± 3064.672 ops/s >> >> >> java version "9-ea" >> Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 9-ea+116) >> >> Benchmark Mode >> Samples Score Error Units >> o.a.l.l.p.j.AsyncAppenderLog4j2LocationBenchmark.throughputSimple thrpt >> 20 96090.261 ± 4565.763 ops/s >> >
