Please don't use reflection to reach into private internals of classes you
don't maintain. We have public and private for a reason. Furthermore,
this access may throw a SecurityException if a SecurityManager is in use.
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 11:25 AM, David Dabbs dmda...@gmail.com wrote:
of strings to en/decode was small.
Did the same hold true when using a ThreadLocal?
David
-Original Message-
From: Evan Jones [mailto:ev...@mit.edu]
Sent: Monday, May 31, 2010 4:32 PM
To: David Dabbs
Cc: Protocol Buffers
Subject: Re: [protobuf] Java UTF-8 encoding/decoding: possible
On Jun 1, 2010, at 2:29 , David Dabbs wrote:
Even with the extra call to access the offset, I would think there
would be some advantage to not making the data copies, which
generate garbage cruft.
However, the way I am doing it doesn't generate any garbage: I keep a
temporary char[]
The approach I found worked the best:
1. Copy the string into a pre-allocated and re-used char[] array. This
is needed since the JDK does not permit access to the String's
char[] ,to enforce immutability. This is a performance loss VS the
JDK, which can access the char[] directly
On May 31, 2010, at 14:25 , David Dabbs wrote:
you may access a String's internals via reflection in a safe, albeit
potentially implementation-specific way. See class code below.
As long as your java.lang.String uses value for the char[] and
offset for the storage offset, this should work.
No
On May 18, 2010, at 0:33 , Kenton Varda wrote:
What if you did a fast scan of the bytes first to see if any are non-
ASCII? Maybe only do this fast scan if the data is short enough to
fit in L1 cache?
I didn't try this exact idea, but my guess is that it may not be a
win: to get fast
That seems simple enough and likely to produce a net win often enough.
--Chris
On May 17, 2010, at 9:33 PM, Kenton Varda ken...@google.com wrote:
What if you did a fast scan of the bytes first to see if any are non-ASCII?
Maybe only do this fast scan if the data is short enough to fit in L1
This does somewhat suggestive that it might be worthwhile specifically
tagging a field as ASCII only. There are enough cases of this that it
could be a huge win.
On 5/17/10, Evan Jones ev...@mit.edu wrote:
On May 17, 2010, at 15:38 , Kenton Varda wrote:
I see. So in fact your code is quite
What if you did a fast scan of the bytes first to see if any are non-ASCII?
Maybe only do this fast scan if the data is short enough to fit in L1
cache?
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 7:59 PM, Christopher Smith cbsm...@gmail.comwrote:
This does somewhat suggestive that it might be worthwhile
I think the 30-80% speed boost would be well worth the extra code size /
memory overhead. Please send me the patch!
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 9:33 AM, Evan Jones ev...@mit.edu wrote:
I've implemented a rough prototype of an optimization to the Java
implementation that serializes Java strings
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Evan Jones ev...@mit.edu wrote:
On Dec 22, 2009, at 19:59 , Kenton Varda wrote:
I wonder if we can safely discard the cached byte array during
serialization on the assumption that most messages are serialized only once?
This is a good idea, and it seems to
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 1:26 AM, Evan Jones ev...@mit.edu wrote:
I've done some quick and dirty benchmarking of Java string encoding/
decoding to/from UTF-8 for an unrelated project, but I've realized
that these performance improvements could be added to protobufs. The
easy way to do UTF-8
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 7:06 PM, David Yu david.yu@gmail.com wrote:
There should be a writeByteArray(int fieldNumber, byte[] value) in
CodedOutputStream so that the cached bytes of strings would
be written directly. The ByteString would not help, it adds more memory
since it creates a
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 8:18 PM, David Yu david.yu@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 11:14 AM, Kenton Varda ken...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 7:06 PM, David Yu david.yu@gmail.com wrote:
There should be a writeByteArray(int fieldNumber, byte[] value) in
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 12:21 PM, Kenton Varda ken...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 8:18 PM, David Yu david.yu@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 11:14 AM, Kenton Varda ken...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 7:06 PM, David Yu david.yu@gmail.comwrote:
15 matches
Mail list logo
