Hi Clebert,

I've been (amongst other things) doing a little bit of investigation on
this topic over the past couple of days. I wrote a microbenchmark that
takes two engines and directly wires their transports together. It then
pumps about 10 million 1K messages from one engine to the other. I ran this
benchmark under jprofiler and codec definitely came up as a hot spot, but
when I apply your patch, I don't see any measurable difference in results.
Either way it's taking about 40 seconds to pump all the messages through.

I'm not quite sure what is going on, but I'm guessing either the code path
you've optimized isn't coming up enough to make much of a difference, or
I've somehow messed up the measurements. I will post the benchmark shortly,
so hopefully you can check up on my measurements yourself.

On a more mundane note, Andrew pointed out that the new files you've added
in your patch use an outdated license header. You can take a look at some
existing files in the repo to get a current license header.

--Rafael



On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Clebert Suconic <csuco...@redhat.com>wrote:

> I just submitted it as a git PR:
>
> https://github.com/apache/qpid-proton/pull/1
>
>
>
> On Apr 30, 2014, at 10:47 AM, Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I think anyone can sign up for ReviewBoard themselves. It certainly
> didn't
> > used to be linked to the ASF LDAP in the past, presumably for that
> reason.
> >
> > Its probably also worth noting you can initiate pull requests against the
> > github mirrors. If it hasn't already been done for the proton mirror, we
> > can have the emails that would generate be directed to this list (e.g.
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/qpid-dev/201401.mbox/%3c20140130180355.3cf9e916...@tyr.zones.apache.org%3E
> ).
> > We obviously can't merge the pull request via github, but you can use
> > the reviewing tools etc and the resultant patch can be downloaded or
> > attached to a JIRA and then applied in the usual fashion (I believe there
> > is a commit message syntax that can be used to trigger closing the pull
> > request).
> >
> > Robbie
> >
> > On 30 April 2014 15:22, Rafael Schloming <r...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 8:35 AM, Clebert Suconic <csuco...@redhat.com
> >>> wrote:
> >>
> >>> @Rafi: I see there is a patch review  process within Apache (based on
> >> your
> >>> other thread on Java8)
> >>>
> >>> Should we make this through the patch process at some point?
> >>>
> >>
> >> I'm fine looking at it on your git branch, but if you'd like to play
> with
> >> the review tool then feel free.  Just let me know if you need an account
> >> and I will try to remember how to set one up (or who to bug to get you
> >> one). ;-)
> >>
> >> --Rafael
> >>
>
>

Reply via email to