[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-160?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12476032 ]
John Stecher commented on OPENJPA-160: -------------------------------------- >From the testing that we have done fooling with different prototyped versions >and making different fields in BrokerImpl static to avoid recreation I am >pretty (almost 100%) sure the cost we are looking at here is just that of >creating this class in general being expensive. I would love to have someone >else profile the code with different tools than I have at my disposal and see >if they find a different culprit. WRT pooling I think a reasonable solution would not be to create a massive pool of objects but just one per thread-id to optimize for the general case. I am assuming that one Broker per thread is common. I am with everyone else in that I would love to keep configuration to a minimum overall. I am not a big fan of exposing pool settings to a user as if we decide to change it later on you might have to support the setting beyond when you really want too. :-) Any thoughts on why this would not work or can someone enlighten me on what the general use case is? Patrick - I would be worried about the Clone being almost as heavy weight as what we are doing now but need to implement and test it. > Reuse BrokerImpl objects > ------------------------ > > Key: OPENJPA-160 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENJPA-160 > Project: OpenJPA > Issue Type: Sub-task > Reporter: Michael Dick > Attachments: perf2.jpg, perf3.jpg > > -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.