Github user merlimat commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/153
@jvrao I don't have a benchmark for this specific change, though I agree it
might make sense to add one.
The points here are:
* In some places we are using `LinkedBlockingQueue` which uses the same
head/tail mutex schema but with a linked list instead of the array
* I don't expect the throughput / cpu utilization to be different between
the 2
* This implementation doesn't require to create a LinkedList node for each
value, so it creates no garbage. This can be significant since we are enqueuing
quite a bit of items (Journal thread, force-sync thread, OrderedSafeExcutor).
For each BK request there were several of these (cannot remember exact number,
though I believe ~3 in Bookie and another ~3 in client)
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
