commons-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Thomas Neidhart (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Resolved] (COLLECTIONS-418) ListUtils.retainAll() is very slow
Date Sun, 26 Aug 2012 21:33:07 GMT

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COLLECTIONS-418?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]

Thomas Neidhart resolved COLLECTIONS-418.
-----------------------------------------

    Resolution: Won't Fix

Added to the javadoc a clarification on the runtime complexity of the method. Users shall
use a data structure for the elements to be retained which supports a fast implementation
of contains.
                
> ListUtils.retainAll() is very slow
> ----------------------------------
>
>                 Key: COLLECTIONS-418
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COLLECTIONS-418
>             Project: Commons Collections
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 3.2.1
>         Environment: java 1.6.0_24
> Ubuntu 11.10
>            Reporter: Adrian Nistor
>         Attachments: patch.diff, Test.java
>
>
> Hi,
> I am encountering a performance problem in ListUtils.retainAll().  It
> appears in version 3.2.1 and also in revision 1355448.  I attached a
> test that exposes this problem and a one-line patch that fixes it.  On
> my machine, for this test, the patch provides a 238X speedup.
> To run the test, just do:
> $ java Test
> The output for the un-patched version is:
> Time is 5485
> The output for the patched version is:
> Time is 23
> As the patch shows, the problem is that
> "ListUtils.retainAll(Collection<E> collection, Collection<?> retain)"
> performs "retain.contains(obj)" for each element in "collection",
> which can be very expensive if "retain.contains(obj)" is expensive,
> e.g., when "retain" is a list.
> The one-line patch I attached puts the elements of "retain" in a
> HashSet (which has very fast "contains()"), if "retain" is not already
> a set:
> "if (!(retain instanceof java.util.Set<?>)) retain = new HashSet<Object>(retain);"
> Is this a bug, or am I misunderstanding the intended behavior? If so,
> can you please confirm that the patch is correct?
> Thanks,
> Adrian

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

Mime
View raw message