hc-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From bugzi...@apache.org
Subject DO NOT REPLY [Bug 20981] - HTTPClient trace() calls a lot of overhead; consider isTraceEnabled() test
Date Sat, 21 Jun 2003 01:56:54 GMT
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG 
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20981>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND 
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20981

HTTPClient trace() calls a lot of overhead; consider isTraceEnabled() test





------- Additional Comments From adrian@ephox.com  2003-06-21 01:56 -------
Wrapping the calls in isTraceEnabled() would not make any difference because that's pretty
much 
exactly what is done in the actual trace call right off the bat.  The only reason to use 
isTraceEnabled() is when the construction of the actual string passed to the call would take
time to 
create and this is not the case with the trace statements since they are static strings and
thus are 
already instantiated and ready to go.

Our only option is to remove the trace statements if we feel the improvement in performance
is 
worthwhile.  I would be surprised to find that the trace statements are the real bottleneck

particularly when compared with the network latency.  We'd need to do some profiling.

Mime
View raw message