Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-harmony-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 9592 invoked from network); 6 Jun 2008 10:23:42 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Jun 2008 10:23:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 18882 invoked by uid 500); 6 Jun 2008 10:23:43 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-harmony-dev-archive@harmony.apache.org Received: (qmail 18855 invoked by uid 500); 6 Jun 2008 10:23:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@harmony.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@harmony.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@harmony.apache.org Received: (qmail 18844 invoked by uid 99); 6 Jun 2008 10:23:43 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 06 Jun 2008 03:23:43 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of aleksey.shipilev@gmail.com designates 209.85.132.250 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.132.250] (HELO an-out-0708.google.com) (209.85.132.250) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 06 Jun 2008 10:22:54 +0000 Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id c10so209169ana.71 for ; Fri, 06 Jun 2008 03:23:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=WILl4PWFsm/c2OU6pwvmnY5R5ly406bjvUWTyDNFVBI=; b=HlFKMMgmP3pIYS49VfRqVyh81G0iAmRnRTZ1hZo/9I00EaYb0h5a6a6p5ITNJ7dU0W 56+0+yAvvxGDPTMDOLT3COPggy5wQmIsLm06XBo/JYOUpz3+KSt2ERXxQFb6rOlYZ2xj AlHt9D1oTUXA2XET5yEOgoSHWLEzAnE2MTlnI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=fKH2wIaInvz62gyKAOE7Pf5fUqVpZ97UWjge1PmOsYhS2vrLJ+Os/qrRMusCgTFpxW lttAXu3lGpTkb/unZH2uHAhAwcASWhHxIgdapM4jTCtnuDwtVU00hubUbDkwhU6qoY/r bqDFybPd5J4Z/RiHyFh2bjuzO7llJk5dVe8+A= Received: by 10.100.154.9 with SMTP id b9mr4650108ane.78.1212747790700; Fri, 06 Jun 2008 03:23:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.122.1 with HTTP; Fri, 6 Jun 2008 03:23:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4bebff790806060323y79581df3y1e57b0482206015b@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 14:23:10 +0400 From: "Aleksey Shipilev" To: dev@harmony.apache.org Subject: Re: My first submission! java.lang.ThreadLocal In-Reply-To: <9623c9a50806060316u4b1087f9u7854ea0d6d974a8c@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <4bebff790806060200w333b521exd5d5d77eb68926fe@mail.gmail.com> <9623c9a50806060316u4b1087f9u7854ea0d6d974a8c@mail.gmail.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 2:16 PM, Xiao-Feng Li wrote: >> NB: This patch gives 7.6x boost on MTHarness/ThreadLocalBench and +25% >> to SPECjvm2008:serial. > Good numbers! I read the perf is still bad compared to RI? Have you > any estimation about the reason? The performance of ThreadLocal is bad compared to RI, while SPECjvm2008:serial is not (assuming all other patches are applied). I hadn't investigated the reason of ThreadLocal though, but I think the problematic area is open-addressed tuple-stored map implementation by Bob. Bob, had you tried other layout schemes (like splitting key/values arrays, various probing schemes, etc.)? What was the rationale behind this implementation? Thanks, Aleksey.