[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [aspectj-users] Very Slow Fields Cut
|
Hey Andy ,
First thanks for the quick responds. I'm glad that my post made sense to
somebody. I understand the different between the cold and hot. but I still
don't understand why is the pointcut is too expensive. let me alter the Car
class like this:
/////////////////////////////////////////////
public class Car {
private int model=0;
public int getModel() {
return model;
}
public void setModel(int model) {
this.model = model;
}
public void setProperty(String s,Object o){
if (s.equals("model")){
setModel((Integer)o);
}
}
public Object getProperty(String s){
if (s.equals("model")){
return getModel();
}else{
return null;
}
}
}
/////////////////////////////////////////////////
Then add this to the main (benchmark) ,as you can see I'm accessing the
'model' through string (just to make the non-direct call)
Car car2 = new Car();
for (int i = 0; i < LOOP; i++) {
//Set
car2.setProperty("model", i);
//Get
out = (Integer) car2.getProperty("model");
}
currentTime = System.currentTimeMillis() - lastTime;
System.out.println("Non-Direct:" + currentTime);
////////////////////Now here are the results //////////////////////////
Super:157
Normal:28
Non-Direct:92
Super:117
Normal:24
Non-Direct:62
Super:137
Normal:25
Non-Direct:51
And this what I though the AspectJ pointcut will cost just twice the speed
but as you can see that the Normal Car class is running (5.48) times faster.
this is a lot, especially that this is cutting fields (will be accessed
millions of times).
I need a high performance AOP. I guess I need to look at the javassist to
because I could add the pointcut with only 50% performance loss.
it would be nice if people that understand the AspectJ compiler explain to
me why it's taking that long for the pointcut .
Thanks
Andy Clement wrote:
>
> I've just tried your program, first on a 1.5 VM. I also changed your
> benchmark code to do the run three times in the main() method so the
> JIT has a chance to be 'warmed up' with the code paths.
>
> Super:106
> Normal:16
> Super:80
> Normal:16
> Super:82
> Normal:16
>
> I then tried it with a 1.6VM:
> Super:63
> Normal:9
> Super:33
> Normal:9
> Super:32
> Normal:9
>
> Not brilliant, I know, but not as bad as you seem to be seeing. Even
> though you are only doing proceed() from your advice at the moment,
> the code is all in place for obtaining the aspect instance at each
> join point and then invoking the advice. So if you did more in your
> advice body, it won't be a further large performance impact, it is
> purely getting to the advice that is the big impact. For the case
> where proceed() is all you do in the advice we could optimize it all
> away and do no weaving, but that is the rather uncommon case...
>
> cheers,
> Andy.
>
> 2008/5/9 nnaass <alaamurad@xxxxxxxxx>:
>>
>> Hi everyone,
>> I'm trying to cut across all fields sets and gets in my class but aspectj
>> is
>> delivering very low performance even while I'm just directly calling the
>> proceed() in the point cut.
>>
>> I created 2 classes, one with aspectj (SuperCar) and one just POJO (Car)
>> the
>> SuperCar has a pointcut in all the fields (for now only the "model"
>> field
>> ).
>>
>> ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
>> public class Car {
>> private int model=0;
>> public int getModel() {
>> return model;
>> }
>> public void setModel(int model) {
>> this.model = model;
>> }
>> }
>>
>> ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
>>
>> /**
>> * This will cut all get & set in the SuperCar ( But as you can see that
>> I'm
>> doing nothing only passing it again using proceed )
>> */
>> public privileged aspect SuperObjectController{
>> pointcut getProperty(SuperObject o): this(o) && get(@SuperProperty *
>> *)
>> && target(SuperObject+);
>> Object around(SuperObject o):
>> getProperty(o)
>> {
>> return proceed(o);
>> }
>> pointcut setProperty(SuperObject o,Object v): this(o) && args(v) &&
>> set(@SuperProperty * *) && target(SuperObject+) ;
>> void around(SuperObject o,Object v):
>> setProperty(o,v)
>> {
>> proceed(o,v);
>> }
>> }
>>
>> ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////
>>
>> @Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
>> @Target(ElementType.FIELD)
>>
>> public @interface SuperProperty {
>> boolean ensureGroupValue() default false;
>> }
>>
>> /////////////////////////////////////////////////////
>> public class SuperObject {
>> }
>> /////////////////////////////////////////////////////
>> public class SuperCar extends SuperObject{
>> @SuperProperty private int model=0;
>>
>> public int getModel() {
>> return model;
>> }
>>
>> public void setModel(int model) {
>> this.model = model;
>> }
>>
>> }
>> ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////
>> public static void main(String[] args) {
>> // TODO code application logic here
>> int LOOP=1000000;
>> long lastTime,currentTime;
>> int out;
>> lastTime=System.currentTimeMillis();
>> SuperCar superCar=new SuperCar();
>> superCar.setModel(0);
>> for (int i=0;i<LOOP;i++){
>> //Set
>> superCar.setModel(i);
>> //Get
>> out=superCar.getModel();
>> }
>> currentTime=System.currentTimeMillis()-lastTime;
>> System.out.println("Super:"+currentTime);
>> lastTime=System.currentTimeMillis();
>> Car car=new Car();
>> for (int i=0;i<LOOP;i++){
>> //Set
>> car.setModel(i);
>> //Get
>> out=car.getModel();
>> }
>> currentTime=System.currentTimeMillis()-lastTime;
>> System.out.println("Normal:"+currentTime);
>> }
>> ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////
>> this is the output for both classes.
>>
>> Super:414
>> Normal:35
>>
>> As you can see that the Super toke 0.414 second to set and get while the
>> POJO toke only 0.035 , I don't understand why aspectj it to slow ? How
>> it's
>> being compile ?
>>
>> POJO is about 11.4 times faster without aspectJ cuts. I was thinking it
>> would be 50% slower for the extra call but not 8 % !.
>>
>>
>> Thanks in advance
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/Very-Slow-Fields-Cut-tp17139141p17139141.html
>> Sent from the AspectJ - users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> aspectj-users mailing list
>> aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
>>
> _______________________________________________
> aspectj-users mailing list
> aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Very-Slow-Fields-Cut-tp17139141p17157297.html
Sent from the AspectJ - users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
