← 输入框|github.com|刷新
Skip to content

Flyweight support of key re-used objects - #3940

Closed
bbakerman wants to merge 2 commits into
masterfrom
flyweight-support
Closed

Flyweight support of key re-used objects#3940
bbakerman wants to merge 2 commits into
masterfrom
flyweight-support

Conversation

@bbakerman

@bbakerman bbakerman commented Apr 29, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I wanted to see if flyweight objects could be used for two very commonly created "cache key" objects, namely CacheKey and FieldCoordinates

This results in WAY less objects being allocated when they are used over and over with the same values. So this is a nett saving in memory in a a called system that is loading the same logical objects over and over. And this is likely to always be the case.

HOWEVER the thing happening here in terms of speed is

  • how fast can Java allocate a new object
  • vs
  • how fast can it do 2 or 3 map lookups

And the answer to that is that new Java objects are 361% faster than map lookups.

So this becomes a trade off between objects being allocated and cpu throughput

And its not worth taking - we should not merge this PR

However I wanted to create the PR to show my working

Benchmark                                                                      Mode  Cnt      Score     Error   Units
FlyWeightBenchmark.benchMarkDirectInstantiationThroughput                     thrpt    9    134.741 ±   0.299  ops/ms

FlyWeightBenchmark.benchMarkDirectInstantiationThroughput:gc.alloc.rate       thrpt    9   9251.771 ±  20.519  MB/sec
FlyWeightBenchmark.benchMarkDirectInstantiationThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm  thrpt    9  72000.029 ±   0.023    B/op
FlyWeightBenchmark.benchMarkDirectInstantiationThroughput:gc.count            thrpt    9   1400.000            counts
FlyWeightBenchmark.benchMarkDirectInstantiationThroughput:gc.time             thrpt    9    692.000                ms

FlyWeightBenchmark.benchMarkUsingFlyweightsThroughput                         thrpt    9     29.223 ±   0.761  ops/ms

FlyWeightBenchmark.benchMarkUsingFlyweightsThroughput:gc.alloc.rate           thrpt    9   2006.581 ±  52.273  MB/sec
FlyWeightBenchmark.benchMarkUsingFlyweightsThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm      thrpt    9  72000.132 ±   0.121    B/op
FlyWeightBenchmark.benchMarkUsingFlyweightsThroughput:gc.count                thrpt    9    596.000            counts
FlyWeightBenchmark.benchMarkUsingFlyweightsThroughput:gc.time                 thrpt    9    238.000                ms

FlyWeightBenchmark.benchMarkDirectInstantiationAvgTime                         avgt    9      0.008 ±   0.001   ms/op

FlyWeightBenchmark.benchMarkDirectInstantiationAvgTime:gc.alloc.rate           avgt    9   9071.949 ± 245.016  MB/sec
FlyWeightBenchmark.benchMarkDirectInstantiationAvgTime:gc.alloc.rate.norm      avgt    9  72000.042 ±   0.018    B/op
FlyWeightBenchmark.benchMarkDirectInstantiationAvgTime:gc.count                avgt    9   1154.000            counts
FlyWeightBenchmark.benchMarkDirectInstantiationAvgTime:gc.time                 avgt    9    805.000                ms

FlyWeightBenchmark.benchMarkUsingFlyweightsAveTime                             avgt    9      0.035 ±   0.001   ms/op

FlyWeightBenchmark.benchMarkUsingFlyweightsAveTime:gc.alloc.rate               avgt    9   1974.576 ±  72.272  MB/sec
FlyWeightBenchmark.benchMarkUsingFlyweightsAveTime:gc.alloc.rate.norm          avgt    9  72000.123 ±   0.133    B/op
FlyWeightBenchmark.benchMarkUsingFlyweightsAveTime:gc.count                    avgt    9    586.000            counts
FlyWeightBenchmark.benchMarkUsingFlyweightsAveTime:gc.time                     avgt    9    287.000                ms

Note here how its much slower in cpu terms but much more efficient in memory terms with a lot less GC happening

@bbakerman bbakerman added Not to be merged spikes or other stuff that should never or not yet to be merged performance work that is primarily targeted as performance improvements labels Apr 29, 2025
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Apr 29, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Test Results

0 tests   0 ✅  0s ⏱️
0 suites  0 💤
0 files    0 ❌

Results for commit 03ca8a4.

bbakerman
bbakerman commented Apr 29, 2025
View reviewed changes
Comment thread src/jmh/java/benchmark/BenchmarkUtils.java
}

public static Blackhole blackHole() {
return new Blackhole("Today's password is swordfish. I understand instantiating Blackholes directly is dangerous.");

@bbakerman bbakerman Apr 29, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Those crazy JMH people!

@bbakerman bbakerman mentioned this pull request Apr 29, 2025
Open
@bbakerman bbakerman closed this May 8, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

Not to be merged spikes or other stuff that should never or not yet to be merged performance work that is primarily targeted as performance improvements

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant

@bbakerman