harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Regis <xu.re...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Security Performance issue
Date Thu, 22 Jul 2010 09:32:56 GMT
On 2010-07-22 14:26, Ray Chen wrote:
> Hi Regis,
> You mean init these providers is slow, right? But actually we should
> not init unnecessary providers.
>
> I added some info in our code as following and you can see init these
> provider takes most of the time:
> <code>
> ...
> long start = System.currentTimeMillis();
> p = (Provider) Class.forName(providerClassName.trim(), true, cl).newInstance();
> System.out.println("init " + p.getName() + "takes " +
> (System.currentTimeMillis()-start) + " ms");
> providers.add(p);
> providersNames.put(p.getName(), p);
> long start2 = System.currentTimeMillis();
> initServiceInfo(p);
> System.out.println("init services of " + p.getName() + "takes " +
> (System.currentTimeMillis() - start2) + " ms" );
> ...
> </code>
>
> And the output is:
> init DRLCertFactorytakes 226 ms
> init services of DRLCertFactorytakes 6 ms
> init Cryptotakes 1 ms
> init services of Cryptotakes 1 ms
> init HarmonyJSSEtakes 0 ms
> init services of HarmonyJSSEtakes 1 ms
> init BCtakes 204 ms
> init services of BCtakes 11 ms
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 2:01 PM, Regis<xu.regis@gmail.com>  wrote:

init DRLCertFactorytakes 226 ms
init BCtakes 204 ms

It seems provider itself spent a lot of time.

Have you compared time of following code against RI and Harmony with the same 
provider class name?

(Provider) Class.forName(providerClassName.trim(), true, cl).newInstance();

If there were still huge gaps, I think it's not caused by way we load providers, 
maybe there are other performance hole in some places. I agree that the way 
loading providers still have room to improve, but we need to find out and shoot 
the most outstanding issue first.



-- 
Best Regards,
Regis.

Mime
View raw message