Does concurrency need to be taken into account for the cache? If so, you need to consider how access to the cache will be synchronized. An intrinsic lock? A ConcurrentHashMap? and so on.
Gary On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 2:36 AM, Simone Tripodi <simonetrip...@apache.org>wrote: > Hi all OGNL folks, > my today's topic is about internal cache, that can be IMHO improved in > therms of performance; its implementation is a multi-value map alike, > based on a fixed-size array, a function is applied to each key to > calculate the array index, each array element is a Collection of > element. > Even if getting the list of element related to a general key 'k' has > complexity of O(1), which is fine, insert/search operations are not > the best because their complexity is O(m) where m is the size of list > related to the key. > Follow below my proposal: there's no need to reinvent the wheel, so > the array implementation can be replaced with the already provided > HashMap, where each map value is a simple implementation of balanced > binary heap (AFAIK commons-collections already provides an > implementation), that allows us reducing insert/search complexity to > O(log m). > WDYT? Is is a worth or trivial added value? I know that maybe cache > dimension is relatively small, but linear search sounds too basic, > isn't it? > Looking forward to your feedbacks, have a nice day, > Simo > > http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ > http://www.99soft.org/ > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > -- Thank you, Gary http://garygregory.wordpress.com/ http://garygregory.com/ http://people.apache.org/~ggregory/ http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
