commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Simon Kitching <>
Subject Re: [digester] Are performance improvements wanted?
Date Sun, 12 Sep 2004 21:27:59 GMT
On Mon, 2004-09-13 at 08:38, Reid Pinchback wrote:

> The first performance-related patch I'll submit 
> shows how I approximate this.  Mostly I try to
> minimize how much JIT, GC, and differences in
> inheritance hierarchy depth can distort the
> comparison.  The case I've put together is on 
> what the impact would be of handling logger
> initialization statically in the Digester class.
> Not a big win, obviously, but an easy example of 
> the approach.  Besides cutting constructor cost 
> in 1/2 is never bad.

Hi Reid,

I'm also interested in seeing performance patches. It's great to hear
you're working on this topic.

You should be warned, though, that the logging area is particularly
tricky. From what I remember, there is a requirement that frameworks
which use digester (eg j2ee app servers) must be able to direct logging
output to different destinations depending on which "app" the framework
is running the digester on behalf of.

There's some email discussion about logging in digester from about a
year back that goes into this in some depth; I was not happy with the
way logging worked in Digester but after Craig explained why it was the
way it was, and what the requirements were, I was not able to find a
better way to organise logging while satisfying the original

I'm not saying there *isn't* a way to improve digester logging, just
that it is probably necessary to read that email thread first to be sure
the "improvements" still satisfy the requirements as described by Craig.

[of course these requirements should really be coded as unit tests so
that required behaviour *can't* be changed without unit test

I'm certain, however, that there are a number of other places where
optimisations are available, and look forward to seeing some



To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message