Loading...

hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org

[Prev] Thread [Next]  |  [Prev] Date [Next]

Re: [hibernate-dev] Optimizing reflection optimization Кирилл Кленский Wed Jun 02 17:00:18 2010

Hi,

I have done some tests that are more pure in that they do not involve the
application logic.

Java version: jdk1.6.0_19 32-bit
Results include both client and server mode tests. Numbers represent 100 000
000 invocations time in milliseconds.

The result format is the following:
   server_mode_test_time(server_mode_warmup_time) -
client_mode_test_time(client_mode_warmup_time)

==========================
Method access with direct call
24(4) - 69(70)

Method access with reflection
815(3893) - 36 969(39162)

Method access with reflection and setAccessible(true)
339(640) - 1297(1356)

Method access with generated bytecode
3(2) - 646(666)

Field access with reflection
40333(40016) - 40333(58800)

Field access with reflection and setAccessible(true)
729(786) - 729(7696)
==========================

I have the following thoughts after all:

1. Generated bytecode is comparable to direct access. Strange enough that it
was even faster than direct access in server mode. Tests show that JVM seems
to optimize reflection calls (warmup helps) but the difference between
reflection and direct calls is huge.
2. Setting Method.setAccessible() and Field.setAccessible() to true helps to
avoid security checks and increases the performance. May be this is the
trick Bill is talking about?
This potentially could be a relatively easy way to increase the performance
especially if JVM is running in client mode (method invocation security
checks take approx 10 times more time in client mode compared to server). In
server mode the increase is relatively small for methods (several times) and
huge for fields (approx 50 times).

I have attached the test code if somebody wants to compare results.
Javassist 3.8.0.GA was used to generate bytecode and is required to
build/run the test.

Regards,
Kirill Klenski

2010/5/27 Steve Ebersole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> Perhaps it short circuits those copies and other overheads if no
> security manager is defined (ala as in my IDE).  That would explain how
> I can see minimal improvement while Kirill sees a 4x improvement.
>
> Still rather confirm these numbers are accurate.  Kirill?
>
> On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 10:12 -0400, Bill Burke wrote:
> > Carlo deWolfe found that one of the big perf problems with Java
> > reflection is that it is constantly doing security checks with the
> > security manager and every get/find request makes a copy of the
> > method/field objects.  He had a hack for this, but you'll have to
> > consult him on what it is.  The JBoss Reflections project might have it.
> >
> > I think once this hack is intiated, it is an improvement over Javassist.
> > If you think about it, Java VM has to build up this information
> anyways...
> >
> > Steve Ebersole wrote:
> > > I ran this same exact comparison before and I seem to recall much
> > > different results.  Unfortunately I no longer have that code.  This was
> > > part of
> > > http://opensource.atlassian.com/projects/hibernate/browse/HHH-227
> > >
> > > Can you make sure you "prime" or "warm up" the jvm before you start
> > > taking measurements?
> > >
> > > On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 15:39 +0300, Кирилл Кленский wrote:
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> My measurements have indicated that there is a performance gain. I
> have
> > >> measured the time spent in setPropertyValues and getPropertyValues.
> > >> The optimized version was 4 times faster in these methods giving an
> > >> estimated application performance increase of about 3%.
> > >> Optimizing getPropertyValue and setPropertyValue could give 1.5% more
> > >> according to our rough calculations.
> > >>
> > >> Kirill
> > >>
> > >> 26 мая 2010 г. 23:53 пользователь Emmanuel Bernard
> > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>написал:
> > >>
> > >>> Hi,
> > >>> Have you noticed a perf difference in your application with and
> without the
> > >>> patch?
> > >>> I am wondering if modern VMs have catched up with what Javassist
> does.
> > >>>
> > >>> On 26 mai 2010, at 18:29, Кирилл Кленский wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> 1. I have noticed that
> > >>>>
> org.hibernate.bytecode.javassist.BulkAccessorFactory.findAccessors(...)
> > >>> is
> > >>>> searching for accessor methods in the optimized entity class only.
> This
> > >>>> means that the methods from the superclasses are not visible during
> > >>>> BulkAccessor creation unless overridden by child classes. By
> enhancing
> > >>> the
> > >>>> algorithm to search down the inheritance tree we could avoid
> creation of
> > >>>> redundant methods which increase the code verbosity a lot. In our
> case
> > >>>> almost all the entities are inherited from the base classes having
> the
> > >>>> common entity properties defined, so the reflection optimization
> does not
> > >>>> work for any of them until we override the inherited methods in all
> the
> > >>>> child classes. The implementation is trivial, but I have got a ready
> > >>>> prototype if anybody is interested.
> > >>>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> hibernate-dev mailing list
> > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Steve Ebersole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> http://hibernate.org
>
>
_______________________________________________
hibernate-dev mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev