Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-logging-log4j-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 39557 invoked from network); 24 Nov 2004 16:00:26 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 24 Nov 2004 16:00:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 47236 invoked by uid 500); 24 Nov 2004 15:43:41 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-logging-log4j-dev-archive@logging.apache.org Received: (qmail 47176 invoked by uid 500); 24 Nov 2004 15:43:41 -0000 Mailing-List: contact log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Log4J Developers List" Reply-To: "Log4J Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list log4j-dev@logging.apache.org Received: (qmail 47135 invoked by uid 99); 24 Nov 2004 15:43:40 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_BY_IP,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: domain of skarzhevskyy@gmail.com designates 64.233.184.197 as permitted sender) Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (HELO wproxy.gmail.com) (64.233.184.197) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Wed, 24 Nov 2004 07:43:30 -0800 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 68so99333wri for ; Wed, 24 Nov 2004 07:43:09 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=XTOC+xlHZl0Pvtdl5rthUWdWtNkxoSF1vq2HELV3UUBIXVoWiTCGodTHjD1b3RYIgtnbPXQVnlDmSLQzkO2PEiB5EvXgkUvGQyIvGxGdCUYwLFk5amVRBQ21M53u5czt1RRbTzDu8iJHGiFVDNfGiCewo5r9vKxasI20T5oXu88= Received: by 10.54.33.42 with SMTP id g42mr193718wrg; Wed, 24 Nov 2004 07:41:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.54.32.15 with HTTP; Wed, 24 Nov 2004 07:41:48 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 10:41:48 -0500 From: Vlad Skarzhevskyy Reply-To: Vlad Skarzhevskyy To: Log4J Developers List Subject: Re: log4j LocationInfo performance. In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.0.20041124111746.038b2f30@mail.qos.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <6.0.3.0.0.20041124111746.038b2f30@mail.qos.ch> X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Ceki I have not seen your new method in CVS. I was only reading at "whats is planed" on the website. Now I could not find this page again. It would be nice to have list of changes. Word or two and the way to find this list online as well as planned featues. As to my tests. I will test the reflection method. will keep you posted. Also I have another sugestion you have not answered! getLocationInformation speed linearly depend on the stack size. To it is faster to get new Throwable() as early as posible. In my tests I got two times better perfomance for this. Also my question was why I don't see any speed improvments in my real application? May be there is somthing wrong with Throwable.getStackTrace() and threads. Have you done any tests? Any Why don't you have perfomance results in distribution for 1.2.9 -- Vlad --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org