DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31930>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31930 Zip and & Unzip tasks major slowdown Summary: Zip and & Unzip tasks major slowdown Product: Ant Version: 1.6.2 Platform: PC OS/Version: Other Status: NEW Severity: Critical Priority: Other Component: Core AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] We have a big web application and we use Ant to build it. We also have written a config util to be used during deploy time using Ant. Beginning with 1.6.x, the build as well as the config utility has slowed down significantly. The difference is in the order of two times for build and for the config util in the order of four times. Upon digging into it further, I discovered that the replacement Zip/Unzip functions to support file name encodings from the following files are very slow: org.apache.tools.zip.ZipFile org.apache.tools.zip.ZipOutputStream My test included three class of processors Pentium III, Pentium IV, and Pentium M. Of the three, the problem is almost not visible in Pentium M. The P IV is slower than Pentium M and Pentium III is slower than Pentium IV. To prove this problem, I conducted the following tests (files are attached to the case). My test case only demonstrate the problem with ZipFile class though there is a problem with ZipOutputStream also: I have taken three different ZipFile classes namely from Sun JDK's built-in (java.util.zip package), JazzLib (Same as the one that comes with GNU Classpath but available as standalone from http://jazzlib.sourceforge.net) and Apache Util ZipFile (The one mentioned above and used by Ant to support file encoding). Using each of the three, I read the JDK's tools.jar and throw away the read data. This operation is timed for comparison. I run this test in both a Pentium M laptop and Pentium III laptop. I picked JazzLib because it is also a pure Java implementation of ZipFile. Here are the results. Times are in milliseconds: Pentium M Time taken for JazzZipFile Read: 70 Time taken for JavaZipFile Read: 40 Time taken for ApacheZipFile Read: 321 Pentium III Time taken for JazzZipFile Read: 250 Time taken for JavaZipFile Read: 151 Time taken for ApacheZipFile Read: 941 The above results show that JazzZipFile is only slighly slower than the Sun's JDK ZipFile but Apache ZipFile is quite a bit slower when compared to Sun. Attached: ZipFilePerfTestCase.java jazzlib-binary-0.07.jar (JazzLib jar file. 50k size) To compile and run the file you will need, ant.jar, junit.jar and jazzlib-binary-0.07.jar. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
