harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alexei Fedotov" <alexei.fedo...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [classlib][luni] optimized InputStream reader (HARMONY-5522)
Date Fri, 14 Mar 2008 17:22:52 GMT
Tim, thank you for reading and understanding. I like when my code
passes a review and I am eager to try arguments I've created for
myself. I thought of your variant and liked it because it would be
possible to JIT to inline your version of ByteStream.readFully()

There is some complication caused with a public API exposed by
Manifest class: the constructor and read methods accept a general
InputStream as a source for Manifest. Other applications, such as
Eclipse, read a file themselves and then call Manifest API directly to
get few main attributes. There is a better chance that external
developers would use use documented ByteArrayInputStream to wrap their
bytes than "our possibly optimized internal child" of that class.

I also believe that I decrease overall project astonishment by
encapsulating more complex technique in one place instead of spreading
less conventional things around. Reflection is hidden in a class with
conventional API, and no one would question when reading
ZipFile#getInputStream(ZipEntry) code why he should wrap a resulted
byte buffer in "our possibly optimized internal child" instead of

Finally two these methods may be combined: in addition to
ByteArrayInputStream one may check in readFully(InputStream) if "our
possibly optimized internal child" is supplied an use a quick path
without reflection. I wonder what you and other java gurus think about

On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 7:47 PM, Tim Ellison <t.p.ellison@gmail.com> wrote:
> Alexei Fedotov wrote:
>  > Let me write something more understandable. Breathe, Alexei, breathe slowly.
>  Code is good ;-)
>  > 1. Our native code returns us Zip entries in a form of a byte array
>  > which is later wrapped in ByteArrayInputSteam object.
>  So this is my point.  While I see that you are writing the ByteStream
>  util to reach into a regular ByteArrayInputStream to get the backing
>  array -- my question is why not change the
>  ZipFile#getInputStream(ZipEntry) implementation to return a ByteStream
>  (which will be a subclass of ByteArrayInputStream that will simply
>  return the backing array when asked without reflection).
>  I agree with the rest of the arguments below.
>  Regards,
>  Tim
>  > 2. Instead of copying portions of this ByteArrayInputSteam via
>  > read(buffer) call it is quicker to get a reference to the underlying
>  > buffer using reflection and work with this array.
>  > 3. This big buffer is useful for further manifest verification. This
>  > is a subject of separate [1]. Instead of copying manifest sections
>  > into smaller byte buffers, we maintain a list of relative positions in
>  > the big buffer, and update the digests using these positions.
>  > Generally, storing two relative positions is much cheaper than
>  > allocating memory and populating it with bytes. That is why I refer to
>  > this change as to implementation cleanup, and not an optimization.
>  > 4.  I wrote ideas of possible further cleanup in TODO comments. They
>  > could be described as follows: I removed two of six copies (acts of
>  > copying) of a manifest byte before it becomes accessible as a key or
>  > value in a java hash table. Another two copies are easy to be removed,
>  > so there is enough place for improvement here.
>  >
>  > If we would only know the algorithm which will be used for digesting,
>  > we may replace a manifest buffer with few signatures which might be
>  > updated while manifest is read. After algorithm is known the manifest
>  > may be verified in one pass.
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 6:03 PM, Tim Ellison <t.p.ellison@gmail.com> wrote:
>  >> Alexei Fedotov wrote:
>  >>  > I see the question. The general InoouttStream cannot be optimized, but
>  >>  > our implementation returns ByteArrayInputStream. We can choose a fast
>  >>  > path without using arraycopy  if we are first to read from this
>  >>  > ByteArrayInputStream object. We just get get a reference to the
>  >>  > underlying buffer and return it without copying the contents. This
>  >>  > works only for unmodified ByteArrayInputStream object, but this is
>  >>  > exactly our case.
>  >>
>  >>  Yep, I see that.  Now how will you use it (i.e. can you show the code
>  >>  that references ByteStream)?  I can see where you are going but want to
>  >>  see the whole picture.
>  >>
>  >>  Regards,
>  >>  Tim
>  >>
>  >>
>  >
>  >
>  >

With best regards,

View raw message