mina-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Michael Grundvig" <m...@electrotank.com>
Subject Re: 1000+ simultaneous connections with data transfer?
Date Sat, 21 Apr 2007 16:16:13 GMT
I'm using Trove for a large project currently. It's faster at times and 
slower at others with the newest JDK. Overall though, if you can get away 
with a primitive as the key, it works quite well. The licensing is a problem 
though as it's GPL.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ming Fang" <mingfang@mac.com>
To: <dev@mina.apache.org>
Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2007 11:09 AM
Subject: Re: 1000+ simultaneous connections with data transfer?

> Has anyone try using the Trove HashMap implementation(http:// 
> trove4j.sourceforge.net/)?
> For some tests it is many times faster than the JDK one.
> On Apr 21, 2007, at 9:58 AM, Richard Lowe wrote:
>>   I found that HashMap lookups with this amount of packets can be 
>> particularly expensive, as can creating byte arrays (even tiny  ones).  I 
>> find that Mina session attributes are very useful.  I  know all of that 
>> sounds obvious, but you'd be surprised how simple  little operations can 
>> stack up.
>> If you have to write a byte array to the IoHandler adapter, use 
>> ByteBuffer.wrap(b) - this seems pretty fast.
>> I hope that might be useful for anybody else trying to do anything 
>> similar!
>> Cheers,
>> Richard.
>> --
>> Trustin Lee wrote:
>>> Additionally, did you try to turn on 'tcp no delay' option? (this
>>> doesn't affect CPU utilization but might improve throughput)
>>> ((SocketSessionConfig) cfg.getSessionConfig()).setTcpNoDelay(true);
>>> and... It would be nice to see your IoHandler implementation code.
>>> HTH,
>>> Trustin

View raw message