geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "John C. Dale" <>
Subject Reflection Bad, OO and direct Method invocation Good...
Date Sat, 09 Aug 2003 13:16:37 GMT
I'm concerned about your mention of reflection.  I really like 
reflection, and think it has many useful applications in the application 
development space, but should be kept out of any runtime application 
that has stringent scalability and performance requirements.  Although 
reflection allows an incredibly generic way to solve many difficult 
problems, and really opens the door to completely grandios perfectly 
idealistic genericititousness ;)  , a straight-forward OO approach to 
solving the problems would 1) be faster and 2) be easier to read and 
maintain.  I've seen reflection based approaches work, and I've seen 
them bomb.

One might argue that in a container based system that will eventually 
support clustering and scalability doesn't have to worry about savoring 
individual CPU cycles that might be expended needlessly with a 
reflection-based design.  Just add more hardware and the user experience 
will be perpetually preserved.  I would argue, however, that the 
development community will be able to make better use of the product if 
the rate at which additional hardware purchases becomes necessary 
decreases.  The philosophy, IMHO, should be to solve the problems at 
hand with straight-forward OO solutions, and not to focus so much on 
being generic and supporting n * infinity solutions up-front.  Using 
things like the Policy/Strategy pattern at well-selected locations will 
afford the opportunity for pluggability without compromising 
maintainability and performance.

Here are some dramatic results:


public void init()
   customer = new Customer();

public void run()

*Interface (Polymorphism):*

public void init()
  customer = new Customer();
public void run()
  Person person = (Person) customer;;


public void init()
  customer = new Customer();
      method = customer.getClass().getMethod("work", new Class[0]);
  catch (Exception e) 
   params = new Object[0];

public void run() 
    method.invoke(customer, params);
  catch (Exception e) 

With 1000000 of the above code, here were the results:

JDK DirectTest InterfaceTest ReflectionTest
*Sun 1.4* 52 ms 54 ms 543 ms
*Sun 1.4 -server* 26 ms 56 ms 279 ms
*Sun 1.3* 124 ms 128 ms 2168 ms
*Sun 1.3 -server* 41 ms 58 ms 2012 ms
*IBM 1.3* 75 ms 78 ms 2134 ms

Reflection will significantly effect the performance of the system and 
should be avoided for any runtime operations.  Where it should and could 
definitely be applied is with the dynamic generation and compilation of 
code, or generation of metadata.  Otherwise, even at the recommendation 
of Sun, it should be avoided for runtime operations.


John C. Dale

Leo Simons wrote:

> Jason Dillon wrote:
>> PS. Can someone write up something about the current state of the 
>> major component containers out there with a feature blurb... no soap 
>> boxes, just the facts jack.
> What, no soap boxes? How on earth can anyone comply with that? ;) No 
> wait,
> you weren't asking me anyway, were you. Ah, e-mail already typed. Bummer.
> = My Opinion =
> You should *not* be evaluating component containers. You should save 
> this discussion
> for a later date and just code your way to 1.0. The basic design idea 
> overview
> below should show that most of the architectural concepts behind all 
> these containers are
> very similar. I've been experimenting (no, I will not plug it, you 
> will just get confused) with
> some reflection that will allow any component written for any of the 
> below to run in any
> of the other containers, and that is feasible, straightforward and 
> performant.
> So write your components to plug in whatever you have, do a nice IoC, 
> setup, and you will be able to defer refactoring around an external 
> container until much later.
> But that's my opinion, and I have now said it three times, and your a 
> responsible adult
> (yep, its a guess, you could also be 11 years old :D). Switching 
> soapbox mode off.
> = Disclaimer =
> Comparing component containers is comparing apples with pears. Avalon 
> is by far the
> biggest 'generic' project at the moment, for example, but recent 
> developments utilize AOP
> and interceptor architecture to support a much 'lighter' 
> container-component api and
> contract. Indeed, picocontainer was started by an avalon elder from 
> the firm belief that
> things should be simpler and smaller. So to actually evaluate all this 
> stuff, you really should
> spend a day or so delving into the websites and the code of all these 
> projects, and backing
> tech like nanning ( and aspectj 
> ( I would start
> by looking at pico/nano and xwork, then take a look at the tutorials 
> for avalon-merlin.
> The other projects have a smaller community atm, and I tend to value 
> community size
> and vibe.
> Furthermore, I have strong opinions about stuff, and allegations to 
> various projects, hence
> this is not an objective overview, even though I tried to make it 
> somewhat objective.
> = Features/ design idea shorthands =
> IoC = Inversion of Control, the idea that an application is controlled 
> from the top down
> SoC = Seperation of Coccerns, the idea that a class (aspect) should do 
> one job and do it well
> SAI = Seperation of API from Implementation, the idea that you define 
> and code to work
>    interfaces
> AOP = Aspect Oriented Programming, mostly lightweight nowadays where 
> you add a chain
>    of interceptors around a method call that can handle orthogonal 
> concerns
> DecP = Declarative Programming, where you use a declarative-style 
> language (usually xml) to
>    determine things like component wiring (ie your average tomcat 
> config file, generalized)
> EBP = Event Based Programming, basically making the inter-object 
> method call asynchronous
>    and encapsulating such a call into some kind of event object that 
> can be queued, modfied,
>    etc
> = No particular order, incomplete list =
> - IoC, SoC, SAI, AOP, DecP, 
> EBP. Nearing
> 1.0 release. Used in webwork2 (a competitor to struts). EBP very basic 
> only. Lean and mean,
> but not mature and some client-server web-layer specific assumptions. 
> Don't like the XXXAware
> interfaces. Very vibrant and active community and many famous peeps 
> with J2EE experience
> around at opensymphony.
> and -
> IoC, SoC, SAI, AOP, DecP. 1.0 beta releases. Lean and mean and very 
> extensible and
> embeddable, developed by smart XP peeps, some stuff already in use in 
> some apps, but
> otherwise pretty much alpha. I love picocontainer and the way they're 
> doing the project.
> The dev community is intentionally kept small atm, but many peeps are 
> watching this one.
> - IoC, SoC, SAI, DecP. Container supporting
> avalon-framework components. Used to be 
> yet-another-novel-avalon-container, but I
> think they're growing to be container-component-contract-agnostic. 
> Corporate backed
> development. Smart guys, not so much focussed on releases as on 
> getting all the
> functionality they need (which is a lot) in place. Very much a 
> pragmatic project.
> - Not yet public container development
> (dubbed 'loom' IIRC) by a smart ex-avaloner 'n others. Haven't seen 
> any code yet
> but my guess is it'll be good. The website says "move along" so you 
> prolly should.
> - haven't looked at in too much depth. 
> Seems similar to
> nanocontainer and xwork. Think it has one active developer and a beta 
> release. Some
> smart points made, but too much xml for my taste. Hoping to see some 
> of this rolled into
> Xwork and/or pico.
> - IoC, SoC, SAI, DecP, EBP (EBP for fortress 
> only). By far
> the oldest 'generic container' project. Big committer base, mature 
> codebase, mature
> ASF project (which can be a good thing and a bad thing ;) rather 
> extensive
> 'avalon-framework' (comparatively heavy compared to more recent 
> developments)
> that defines the contracts between a component and a container. Has 3
> container projects to consider: avalon-phoenix, a mature microkernel 
> design,
> avalon-fortress, similar in weight and featureset to something like 
> nanocontainer with a
> 1.0 release (successor to avalon-ecm, the container used in (among 
> other projects)
> apache-cocoon), and avalon-merlin, a more recent development which we 
> _seem_
> to be converging on as the successor to all other previously produced 
> containers. Merlin
> is further described in the email by Stephen Mcconnell. Arguably the 
> biggest,
> most extensive and most dynamic IoC container implementation around 
> (and hence
> also the most complex). Re: my earlier blurb on 'geronimo and avalon' 
> for more
> yadayada.
> - haven't looked at 
> in much detail, but seems
> very similar in scope and setup to avalon at first glance. Framework 
> being refactored out
> of hibernate, one developer, still in alpha with no releases I think. 
> No offense to Howard
> intended, but I think he's cut himself a rather big piece of the 
> puzzle to recode from scratch
> at once. But I am an uninformed whiner, so I'm not going to comment 
> further in the hope that
> Howard will just eventually see the light and direct his energy 
> towards collaboration with the
> avalon peeps :P
> I am spending too much time on writing messages to this mailing list 
> (it is nearly 3am over here).
> I promise this is the last message from me for two weeks :D
> g'night,
> - Leo

View raw message