On 9/24/19 1:01 PM, Brent Christian wrote:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bchristi/8221623/webrev11/
Looks okay. Thanks for doing this.
Mandy
On 9/23/19 4:48 PM, Mandy Chung wrote:
I think doing the measurement for one of these would be adequate.
StackWalkBench.forEach_AllOpts
StackWalkBench.forEach_DefaultOpts
StackWalkBench.forEach_HiddenAndReflectFrames
OK, reduced to just DefaultOpts.
There are a couple of commented
On 9/23/19 2:15 AM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> ...
since logging is no longer using Throwable to examine
the call stack, maybe it makes more sense to move the logging
benchmarks to their own file under:
test/micro/org/openjdk/bench/java/util/logging/ >
Well, I'll let you decide on that. That
On 9/19/19 12:08 PM, Brent Christian wrote:
Hi, Daniel
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bchristi/8221623/webrev09-loggerPerThread/
I think doing the measurement for one of these would be adequate.
StackWalkBench.forEach_AllOpts
StackWalkBench.forEach_DefaultOpts
Hi Brent,
On 19/09/2019 20:08, Brent Christian wrote:
Well-spotted.
JMH defaults to using 1 worker thread, but can be configured to use
more. I tried with '-t max' (8 threads on my machine), and the
benchmark NPE'd, as you predicted.
I've updated the benchmark to use a separate handler
Hi, Claes
On 9/19/19 1:40 PM, Claes Redestad wrote:
FYI, you can control the number of forks etc run by make test:
make test TEST="micro:java.lang.StackWalkBench"
MICRO="FORK=1;WARMUP_ITER=2;OPTIONS=-p depth=128"
(documented in doc/testing.md|html)
Neat, thanks!
Still, I agree it might
or make forks/iterations as required parameters when invoking the
microbenchmark through make.
I'm doing the micro test run just for the review and I want it to finish
in short time. Performance runs will be a different configuration.
Mandy
On 9/19/19 1:40 PM, Claes Redestad wrote:
Hi,
Hi,
FYI, you can control the number of forks etc run by make test:
make test TEST="micro:java.lang.StackWalkBench"
MICRO="FORK=1;WARMUP_ITER=2;OPTIONS=-p depth=128"
(documented in doc/testing.md|html)
Still, I agree it might be a good idea to have make test TEST=... run
fewer
Hi, Daniel
On 9/16/19 3:40 AM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
However I have some doubts about the the logging benchmark.
Is the benchmark run in a single thread? If not then
there doesn't seem any guarantee that each call to publish()
will be immediately followed by a call to reset(), but instead,
if
Hi, Mandy
Yes, that 'make' job would take ~7 hours on my machine.
I believe this is typical for running micros using 'make'. AFAICT, the
jmh defaults are used, so it forks (running all the warmups +
iterations) 5 times. Trying another (>100 loc) benchmark at random,
the java.lang.ArrayCopy
Hi Brent,
$ make test TEST="micro:java.lang.StackWalkBench"
It took very long that I killed the job. Does this happen to you?
Mandy
On 9/13/19 3:07 PM, Brent Christian wrote:
Hi,
Please review these StackWalker and Throwable benchmarks for addition
into the JDK microbenchmarks.
Bug:
Hi Brent,
The StackWalker benchmark look good to me.
However I have some doubts about the the logging benchmark.
Is the benchmark run in a single thread? If not then
there doesn't seem any guarantee that each call to publish()
will be immediately followed by a call to reset(), but instead,
if
Hi,
Please review these StackWalker and Throwable benchmarks for addition
into the JDK microbenchmarks.
Bug:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8221623
Webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bchristi/8221623/webrev07/
The StackWalker benchmarks use StackWalker's forEach(), walk(), and
13 matches
Mail list logo
