Yes but only the JMH benchmarks. Is that acceptable? The latency tests and the non-JMH Async Logger tests are too involved...
One thing to bear in mind, we carefully documented the versions of the libraries we compared against with our benchmark results. The fact that newer versions of these libraries are now available does not invalidate those results. It just means that our performance page is not up to date with the latest version. We can try to stay up to date but in my opinion it's okay to let some time elapse if we're busy with other things. Anyway, if just the JMH tests are ok, I'll try to do this in the next month. Remko Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 3, 2017, at 17:24, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > > Remko, > > Would it be possible for you to update the performance page for the next > release? I am uncomfortable with some of the results because I know they have > changed since 2.6. > > Ralph > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
