Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-tomcat-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 44175 invoked from network); 25 Nov 2010 16:11:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 25 Nov 2010 16:11:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 19649 invoked by uid 500); 25 Nov 2010 16:11:29 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-tomcat-dev-archive@tomcat.apache.org Received: (qmail 19476 invoked by uid 500); 25 Nov 2010 16:11:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@tomcat.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Tomcat Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@tomcat.apache.org Received: (qmail 19467 invoked by uid 99); 25 Nov 2010 16:11:28 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 25 Nov 2010 16:11:28 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [212.27.42.3] (HELO smtp3-g21.free.fr) (212.27.42.3) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 25 Nov 2010 16:11:19 +0000 Received: from [192.168.0.10] (unknown [82.224.140.72]) by smtp3-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A0CFA6284 for ; Thu, 25 Nov 2010 17:10:53 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: svn commit: r1036595 - in /tomcat/trunk: java/org/apache/catalina/ java/org/apache/catalina/ha/session/ java/org/apache/catalina/session/ test/org/apache/catalina/session/ From: Remy Maucherat To: Tomcat Developers List In-Reply-To: <20101118195911.DDCC923889ED@eris.apache.org> References: <20101118195911.DDCC923889ED@eris.apache.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2010 17:10:51 +0100 Message-ID: <1290701451.2267.6.camel@mail.remm.hd.free.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.3 (2.30.3-1.fc13) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Thu, 2010-11-18 at 19:59 +0000, markt@apache.org wrote: > Author: markt > Date: Thu Nov 18 19:59:11 2010 > New Revision: 1036595 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1036595&view=rev > Log: > Fix expiration statistics broken by r1036281 > Add session creation and expiration rate statistics based on the 100 most recently created/expired sessions > Modify average session alive time to also use 100 most recently expired sessions > Update benchmarks - new statistics add overhead but not significant in overall processing chain But going back to the original optimization work, I still don't quite understand. As Tim pointed out, the MD5 hash is probably bad, and SecureRandom is already internally thread safe. So the simplest refactoring (remove the hash and the synchroinized block) was not tested. Is it really a big enough bottleneck which would need the more complex plumbing to parallelize ? Rémy --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org