On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 11:49 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin <robertburrelldon...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 8:35 PM, Markus Wiederkehr > <markus.wiederk...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Sorry about my last comment on MIME4J-66. I did not realize that it is >> about Base64Encoder, not Base64OutputStream.. >> >> But is Base64Encoder really necessary? I mean >> CodecUtil.encodeBase64(InputStream, OutputStream) could also be >> implemented as: >> Base64OutputStream b64Out = new Base64OutputStream(out); >> copy(in, b64Out); >> b64Out.close(); >> >> Why maintain two versions? > > copy uses more memory and is slower
I have written another performance test for this. The current code has a throughput of about 6 mb/sec on my machine. The change to Base64OutputStream I proposed boosts it up to 110 mb/sec.. Plus, the current code does not even pass a simple roundtrip test because it writes padding characters in the middle of the stream. I have attached my performance tests to MIME4J-71 if you want to take a look at them. I suggest we remove Base64Encoder and close MIME4J-66 and -67. Markus --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscr...@james.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-h...@james.apache.org
