[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       lucene-dev
Subject:    Re: Interfaces
From:       Erik Hatcher <erik () ehatchersolutions ! com>
Date:       2005-03-18 16:02:52
Message-ID: 5e9cbf908733bc89a732a10c366b0632 () ehatchersolutions ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

I didn't mean to imply that using interfaces themselves were a 
potential performance issue.... what I meant was all the IoC mechanisms 
that might be tossed in as factory overhead to construct things 
indirectly.

	Erik

On Mar 18, 2005, at 10:22 AM, Maik Schreiber wrote:

>> However, the primary focus of Lucene is and always will be 
>> performance.  It would be important to demonstrate that resource 
>> utilization and performance are not adversely affected by such 
>> changes.
>
> I can't see why interfaces should affect performance or resource 
> utilization in a tangible way.
>
> For interface calls, the resulting bytecode would use invokeinterface 
> instead of invokevirtual calls, but the speed difference is absolutely 
> negligible (in the range of 500 nanoseconds per call at most during my 
> tests with JDK 1.5.0_02 and JProfiler 3.3).
>
> Resource utilization would take up some bytes for the additional 
> interfaces and generated code from the JIT compiler, but that's about 
> it.
>
> -- 
> Maik Schreiber   *   http://www.blizzy.de
>
> GPG public key: 
> http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1F11D713
> Key fingerprint: CF19 AFCE 6E3D 5443 9599 18B5 5640 1F11 D713
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]