Mailing-List: contact dev-help@harmony.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of sianjanuary@googlemail.com
 designates 209.85.198.248 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=googlemail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version
         :content-type:references;
        b=rnigKZEoAYmtpnlvjnuPLg1cE9gV3XRsrb7093knYWYJhJ9+MhgLyUJ/MPUPv2nYm5
         Y4DAIVtVKBW47DuFM+r8Bf/zULexjcz6oISQtutLt1M5YDnBvIodCmiJiSFkB/IUIWm4
         QcLCa6X/o4CtqBE4M8/Ucbwjwotu3uFCCc+Gw=
Message-ID: <fc2fc95c0807090827jfb1d284xf046dd1cce93a091@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 16:27:55 +0100
From: "Sian January" <sianjanuary@googlemail.com>
To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Subject: Re: [classlib][pack200][performance] Profiling unpacking scenario
In-Reply-To: <4bebff790807081043g4d42c754q53ff0006d2a170bf@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_Part_707_12011049.1215617275154"
References: <4bebff790807081043g4d42c754q53ff0006d2a170bf@mail.gmail.com>

------=_Part_707_12011049.1215617275154
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Thanks for doing that Aleksey.  In fact I think Sun's was 20 or 30 times
faster before we started doing any performance optimizations, but it looks
like there's still some ground that we could make up!


On 08/07/2008, Aleksey Shipilev <aleksey.shipilev@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I took the liberty of profiling of pack200 implementation on unpacking
> scenario. Source data was obtained from Eclipse JDT jars, repacked in
> single 60 Mb jar file, then packed with pack200 from Sun's JDK (-E9
> used), resulting in 20 Mb pack200-compressed file. Then Sun JDK
> 1.6.0_05 (Windows, -server) was used together with hprof (cpu=time) to
> obtain the profile. My patch from HARMONY-5900 is onboard. The head of
> the profile looks like this:
>
> 4.76% org.apache.harmony.unpack200.bytecode.ClassConstantPool.addNested
> 4.22% java.util.HashMap.getEntry
> 2.99% java.util.AbstractList$Itr.next
> 2.92% java.util.AbstractList$Itr.hasNext
> 2.84% java.util.ArrayList.get
> 2.43% java.util.AbstractList$Itr.next
> 2.41% java.util.HashMap.containsKey
> 2.15% org.apache.harmony.unpack200.IcBands.getRelevantIcTuples
> 2.00% java.util.HashSet.contains
> 1.57% java.io.DataOutputStream.writeUTF
>
> Composite occupancy:
>
> 18.4% java.util.AbstractList
> 18.0% java.util.HashMap
> 15.8% java.util.ArrayList
> 10.5% o.a.h.unpack200.bytecode.ClassConstantPool.*
> 5.3%  o.a.h.unpack200.bytecode.CPUTF8.* (hashcode mostly)
> 4.5% java.io.*
> 4.5% java.lang.String.*
> 4.4% o.a.h.unpack200.bytecode.ByteCode.*
> 3.9%  o.a.h.unpack200.bytecode.Ic{Tuple|Bands}.*
> 14.7% other
>
> So the main concern is Collections usage. ClassConstantPool uses Lists
> excessively, so I suspect the significant amount of time is spent
> there.
>
> NB:
> Timings for the scenario (the less the better):
> Harmony's pack200: 67 secs
> Sun's pack200: 6 secs
>
> Yep, 10 times faster.
>
> Thanks,
> Aleksey.
>


-- 
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU

------=_Part_707_12011049.1215617275154--