On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 14:21:16 GMT, Glavo wrote:
>> Using `ByteArrayLittleEndian` is simpler and faster.
>>
>> `make test TEST="micro:java.util.zip.ZipFileOpen"`:
>>
>>
>> Benchmark (size) Mode Cnt Score Error
>> Units
>> - ZipFileOpen.openCloseZipFile 512
On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 14:21:16 GMT, Glavo wrote:
>> Using `ByteArrayLittleEndian` is simpler and faster.
>>
>> `make test TEST="micro:java.util.zip.ZipFileOpen"`:
>>
>>
>> Benchmark (size) Mode Cnt Score Error
>> Units
>> - ZipFileOpen.openCloseZipFile 512
On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 07:17:42 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
> Hello Glavo, I'll need some more time on this to review this. In the
> meantime, could you update the micro benchmark latest numbers with this
> latest state?
Latest results:
Benchmark (size) Mode Cnt Scor
> Using `ByteArrayLittleEndian` is simpler and faster.
>
> `make test TEST="micro:java.util.zip.ZipFileOpen"`:
>
>
> Benchmark (size) Mode Cnt Score Error Units
> - ZipFileOpen.openCloseZipFile 512 avgt 15 39052.832 ± 107.496 ns/op
> + ZipFileOpen.ope
On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:38:34 GMT, Glavo wrote:
>> Using `ByteArrayLittleEndian` is simpler and faster.
>>
>> `make test TEST="micro:java.util.zip.ZipFileOpen"`:
>>
>>
>> Benchmark (size) Mode Cnt Score Error
>> Units
>> - ZipFileOpen.openCloseZipFile 512
On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:38:34 GMT, Glavo wrote:
>> Using `ByteArrayLittleEndian` is simpler and faster.
>>
>> `make test TEST="micro:java.util.zip.ZipFileOpen"`:
>>
>>
>> Benchmark (size) Mode Cnt Score Error
>> Units
>> - ZipFileOpen.openCloseZipFile 512
On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:38:34 GMT, Glavo wrote:
>> Using `ByteArrayLittleEndian` is simpler and faster.
>>
>> `make test TEST="micro:java.util.zip.ZipFileOpen"`:
>>
>>
>> Benchmark (size) Mode Cnt Score Error
>> Units
>> - ZipFileOpen.openCloseZipFile 512
On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:16:45 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>> Glavo has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or
>> a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes brought in
>> by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains six additional commits since
>> t
On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:38:34 GMT, Glavo wrote:
>> Using `ByteArrayLittleEndian` is simpler and faster.
>>
>> `make test TEST="micro:java.util.zip.ZipFileOpen"`:
>>
>>
>> Benchmark (size) Mode Cnt Score Error
>> Units
>> - ZipFileOpen.openCloseZipFile 512
> Using `ByteArrayLittleEndian` is simpler and faster.
>
> `make test TEST="micro:java.util.zip.ZipFileOpen"`:
>
>
> Benchmark (size) Mode Cnt Score Error Units
> - ZipFileOpen.openCloseZipFile 512 avgt 15 39052.832 ± 107.496 ns/op
> + ZipFileOpen.ope
On Mon, 20 Nov 2023 16:24:31 GMT, Glavo wrote:
>> Using `ByteArrayLittleEndian` is simpler and faster.
>>
>> `make test TEST="micro:java.util.zip.ZipFileOpen"`:
>>
>>
>> Benchmark (size) Mode Cnt Score Error
>> Units
>> - ZipFileOpen.openCloseZipFile 512
On Mon, 20 Nov 2023 16:24:31 GMT, Glavo wrote:
>> Using `ByteArrayLittleEndian` is simpler and faster.
>>
>> `make test TEST="micro:java.util.zip.ZipFileOpen"`:
>>
>>
>> Benchmark (size) Mode Cnt Score Error
>> Units
>> - ZipFileOpen.openCloseZipFile 512
> Using `ByteArrayLittleEndian` is simpler and faster.
>
> `make test TEST="micro:java.util.zip.ZipFileOpen"`:
>
>
> Benchmark (size) Mode Cnt Score Error Units
> - ZipFileOpen.openCloseZipFile 512 avgt 15 39052.832 ± 107.496 ns/op
> + ZipFileOpen.ope
> Using `ByteArrayLittleEndian` is simpler and faster.
>
> `make test TEST="micro:java.util.zip.ZipFileOpen"`:
>
>
> Benchmark (size) Mode Cnt Score Error Units
> - ZipFileOpen.openCloseZipFile 512 avgt 15 39052.832 ± 107.496 ns/op
> + ZipFileOpen.ope
> Using `ByteArrayLittleEndian` is simpler and faster.
>
> `make test TEST="micro:java.util.zip.ZipFileOpen"`:
>
>
> Benchmark (size) Mode Cnt Score Error Units
> - ZipFileOpen.openCloseZipFile 512 avgt 15 39052.832 ± 107.496 ns/op
> + ZipFileOpen.ope
On Mon, 26 Jun 2023 14:14:54 GMT, Lance Andersen wrote:
> @LanceAndersen This one is going to require checking that startup isn't
> impacted.
Now that `ByteArrayLittleEndian` is used in Integer toString, don't think this
patch will affect the startup class loading sequence.
-
PR
> Using `ByteArrayLittleEndian` is simpler and faster.
>
> `make test TEST="micro:java.util.zip.ZipFileOpen"`:
>
>
> Benchmark (size) Mode Cnt Score Error Units
> - ZipFileOpen.openCloseZipFile 512 avgt 15 39052.832 ± 107.496 ns/op
> + ZipFileOpen.ope
> Using `ByteArrayLittleEndian` is simpler and faster.
>
> `make test TEST="micro:java.util.zip.ZipFileOpen"`:
>
>
> Benchmark (size) Mode Cnt Score Error Units
> - ZipFileOpen.openCloseZipFile 512 avgt 15 39052.832 ± 107.496 ns/op
> + ZipFileOpen.ope
On Mon, 26 Jun 2023 14:25:03 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> We shouldn't rush into that as it it creates coupling between java.base and
> jdk.zipfs that is problematic for maintenance, integrity and security. Need
> to be careful with every qualified exports that is added.
Oh well. I'm just confus
On Mon, 26 Jun 2023 14:18:15 GMT, Glavo wrote:
> If there's no reason to stop us from doing this, I can open a new PR to do
> this after this PR is merged.
We shouldn't rush into that as it it creates coupling between java.base and
jdk.zipfs that is problematic for maintenance, integrity and s
On Mon, 26 Jun 2023 14:14:54 GMT, Lance Andersen wrote:
> I think as we compare performance, we also should strive for consistency
> between Zip and ZipFS implementation as well
Can we move `ZipUtils`, `ZipCoder`, and `ZipConstants` to other package (such
as `jdk.internal.zip`)? Then we can sh
On Fri, 23 Jun 2023 20:00:12 GMT, Glavo wrote:
> Using `ByteArrayLittleEndian` is simpler and faster.
>
> `make test TEST="micro:java.util.zip.ZipFileOpen"`:
>
>
> Benchmark (size) Mode Cnt Score Error Units
> - ZipFileOpen.openCloseZipFile 512 avgt 15
On Fri, 23 Jun 2023 20:00:12 GMT, Glavo wrote:
> Using `ByteArrayLittleEndian` is simpler and faster.
>
> `make test TEST="micro:java.util.zip.ZipFileOpen"`:
>
>
> Benchmark (size) Mode Cnt Score Error Units
> - ZipFileOpen.openCloseZipFile 512 avgt 15
On Sat, 24 Jun 2023 06:11:55 GMT, Glavo wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/util/ByteArrayLittleEndian.java
>> line 150:
>>
>>> 148: public static long getUnsignedInt(byte[] array, int offset) {
>>> 149: return Integer.toUnsignedLong((int) INT.get(array, offset));
>>>
On Sat, 24 Jun 2023 05:24:46 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
> Hello Glavo, I was going to recommend adding a test method to existing jtreg
> tests to test these new methods. But it looks like there's no jtreg test for
> this `ByteArrayLittleEndian` class. Would you mind creating a new test class
> t
On Sat, 24 Jun 2023 05:24:24 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> Using `ByteArrayLittleEndian` is simpler and faster.
>>
>> `make test TEST="micro:java.util.zip.ZipFileOpen"`:
>>
>>
>> Benchmark (size) Mode Cnt Score Error
>> Units
>> - ZipFileOpen.openCloseZipFile
On Fri, 23 Jun 2023 20:00:12 GMT, Glavo wrote:
> Using `ByteArrayLittleEndian` is simpler and faster.
>
> `make test TEST="micro:java.util.zip.ZipFileOpen"`:
>
>
> Benchmark (size) Mode Cnt Score Error Units
> - ZipFileOpen.openCloseZipFile 512 avgt 15
On Fri, 23 Jun 2023 20:00:12 GMT, Glavo wrote:
> Using `ByteArrayLittleEndian` is simpler and faster.
>
> `make test TEST="micro:java.util.zip.ZipFileOpen"`:
>
>
> Benchmark (size) Mode Cnt Score Error Units
> - ZipFileOpen.openCloseZipFile 512 avgt 15
On Fri, 23 Jun 2023 20:00:12 GMT, Glavo wrote:
> Using `ByteArrayLittleEndian` is simpler and faster.
>
> `make test TEST="micro:java.util.zip.ZipFileOpen"`:
>
>
> Benchmark (size) Mode Cnt Score Error Units
> - ZipFileOpen.openCloseZipFile 512 avgt 15
On Fri, 23 Jun 2023 20:00:12 GMT, Glavo wrote:
> Using `ByteArrayLittleEndian` is simpler and faster.
>
> `make test TEST="micro:java.util.zip.ZipFileOpen"`:
>
>
> Benchmark (size) Mode Cnt Score Error Units
> - ZipFileOpen.openCloseZipFile 512 avgt 15
30 matches
Mail list logo
