Re: synchronized code
От | Michael Paesold |
---|---|
Тема | Re: synchronized code |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 01a201c2b747$3e7dfb80$3201a8c0@beeblebrox обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | synchronized code (Felipe Schnack <felipes@ritterdosreis.br>) |
Список | pgsql-jdbc |
Felipe Schnack <felipes@ritterdosreis.br> wrote: > I'm quite worried with the amount of synch'd code in our jdbc driver > code, we all know this is a very costly operation in Java. > As far as I could see from the sources, the sole objective of these > calls are to avoid two processes accessing the same shared StringBuffer > we use. The strangest thing, IMHO, is that every time we use this > buffer, we are calling setLength(0) or, in plain english, resetting this > buffer. Is just me the paranoid or this isn't helping performance at > all? As I understand java, object creating is a very cheap operation > these days (in the old days it was slow), but synch'ing is VERY > costly... Sun claims that with Java 1.4, synchronization isn't *that* expensive anymore. Anyway, object creation has improved, too. Which JVM are most people using? Probably more people still use 1.3, especially with J2EE. Just my $0.02. Regards, Michael
В списке pgsql-jdbc по дате отправления: