Since we are only Java 6 now, wouldn't there be a possibility to increase the speed of createuuid() as well? I'm no Java guru, but I heard in Java 6 the underlying code has been improved on.
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 12:28 PM, Vince Bonfanti <[email protected]> wrote: > > I can't think of any reason *not* to do this, as long as the > references are thread-safe (which almost all will be since they're > declared as local variables within methods). The most likely > candidates for performance gains are the > com.naryx.tagfusion.cfm.engine.* and > com.naryx.tagfusion.expression.function.* packages. I did sort of a > random check within these packages and it looks like most > StringBuffers are used for initialization, the toString() method (used > primarily for debugging), or for creating error messages. This means I > wouldn't expect to see great performance gains. Also, it looks like > someone has gone through and already done some of this, since I found > 110 references to StringBuilder. > > Bottom line: it's not a bad idea, but I wouldn't expect to see any > significant gains. > > Vince > > P.S. If you decide to tackle this, you might also want to look at > replacing java.util.Hashtable with java.util.HashMap, for the same > reasons. Again, however, I think this has already been done for most > of the key areas that will affect performance. > > On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 2:31 AM, Peter J. Farrell <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hey Guys, >> >> I noticed that Open BlueDragon minimum JVM is 1.5 now and I was thinking >> about some basic performance increases that I think should be tested and >> if proven successful be rolled in. >> >> The biggest change is java.util.StringBuffer to >> java.util.StringBuilder. StringBuffer methods are all synchronized >> where StringBuilder methods they are not. I did a quick search and it >> looks like StringBuilder could be used in most areas as thread-safety is >> usually not an issue -- especially in things like com.nary.uti.string >> utility or list functions. I found over 130 places in the Open BD code >> base where the older StringBuffer is used. Since StringBuilder is a >> drop in replacement for StringBuffer when synchronization is not >> required, I think some significant performance gains in certain >> functions could be made. >> >> I'd be happy to test and do simple bench marks on my personal machine if >> people think this is a worthy path to explore. I guess I'm looking for >> thoughts on this from somebody on the committee -- don't want to waste >> my time or anybody else's time if has already been explored or not a >> good idea for some reason that I'm not aware of. >> >> Thoughts? >> >> Best, >> .Peter >> > > > > -- Razuna SaaS On-Demand - Hosted Digital Asset Management Solution http://www.razuna.com/ Razuna - Open Source Digital Asset Management http://www.razuna.org/ Follow us on Twitter http://twitter.com/sixsigns --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Open BlueDragon Public Mailing List http://groups.google.com/group/openbd?hl=en official site @ http://www.openbluedragon.org/ !! save a network - trim replies before posting !! -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
