[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [aspectj-users] Very Slow Fields Cut
|
You don't need that '!within()' clause on the second pointcut, that
was just me playing about.
2008/5/9 Andy Clement <andrew.clement@xxxxxxxxx>:
> Ok, I made the changes as you outlined. And did another run (1.6VM) -
> I up'd the loop to 10,000,000 from 1,000,000 as I was getting 0's for
> some measurements.
> Iteration: 1
> Super:234
> Normal:9
> Non-Direct:229
> Iteration: 2
> Super:229
> Normal:2
> Non-Direct:234
> Iteration: 3
> Super:195
> Normal:2
> Non-Direct:227
>
>
> I then changed your aspect to use the field type rather than Object
> (which removes the need for a type conversion):
> Iteration: 1
> Super:31
> Normal:18
> Non-Direct:216
> Iteration: 2
> Super:34
> Normal:2
> Non-Direct:240
> Iteration: 3
> Super:2
> Normal:1
> Non-Direct:239
>
> Here is the new aspect:
>
> public privileged aspect SuperObjectController{
>
> pointcut getProperty(SuperObject o): this(o) && get(@SuperProperty
> * *) && target(SuperObject+);
> int around(SuperObject o): getProperty(o) {
> return proceed(o);
> }
>
> pointcut setProperty(SuperObject o,int v): this(o) && args(v) &&
> set(@SuperProperty * *) && target(SuperObject+) &&
> !within(SuperObjectController);;
> void around(SuperObject o,int v): setProperty(o,v) {
> proceed(o,v);
> }
> }
>
> Andy
>
>
>
> 2008/5/9 nnaass <alaamurad@xxxxxxxxx>:
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> aspectj-users mailing list
>> aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
>>
>
