commons-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Pitts <dan...@coloraura.com>
Subject Re: [io] Should "FileUtils.writeByteArrayToFile(...)" not use a BufferedOutputStream?
Date Sun, 25 Sep 2011 17:59:01 GMT
Buffering is important if you are writing many small chunks in a row.  I
haven't looked at the implementation of writeByteArrayToFile, but I'm
assuming it the entire byte array in one shot and then closes the stream.
Buffering would actually add extra overhead, as it would copy the byte array
into another buffer, and the write that to the final output stream.

On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 9:45 AM, Timo Rumland <timo.rumland@the-cr.de>wrote:

> Hello everyone,
>
> sorry to bump this, but does anyone not have a comment to my question?
> I really think I missed something, I can't imagine that the Commons IO
> "forgot" to buffer the bytes that should be written to a file.
>
> Please see my original question below.
>
> Thanks a lot!
>
> -------------------------------------
>
> > Hello,
>
> > I recently started using the FileUtils class of Commons IO, and had a
> > quick look into the source code.
>
> > The method "FileUtils.writeByteArrayToFile(...)" internally uses the
> > private method "openOutputStream(...)", which creates (after some
> > smart checks) an FileOutputStream.
>
> > But, shouldn't "writeByteArrayToFile(...)" or "openOutputStream(...)"
> > not use/create a BufferedOutputStream, wrapping the FileOutputStream?
>
> > Or do I overlook something?
>
> > I think one should always buffer the bytes when writing to a file...
>
> > Any thoughts?
>
> > Thanks !
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@commons.apache.org
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message