You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to commits@logging.apache.org by rp...@apache.org on 2016/05/14 11:15:41 UTC
logging-log4j2 git commit: LOG4J2-1297 finalized throughput section
of garbage-free manual page
Repository: logging-log4j2
Updated Branches:
refs/heads/master 9bdfd9d72 -> 7f29dbf23
LOG4J2-1297 finalized throughput section of garbage-free manual page
Project: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/logging-log4j2/repo
Commit: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/logging-log4j2/commit/7f29dbf2
Tree: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/logging-log4j2/tree/7f29dbf2
Diff: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/logging-log4j2/diff/7f29dbf2
Branch: refs/heads/master
Commit: 7f29dbf231ac15cbc7c1e619b61b819851b89829
Parents: 9bdfd9d
Author: rpopma <rp...@apache.org>
Authored: Sat May 14 20:16:09 2016 +0900
Committer: rpopma <rp...@apache.org>
Committed: Sat May 14 20:16:09 2016 +0900
----------------------------------------------------------------------
src/site/xdoc/manual/garbagefree.xml | 17 +++++++----------
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/logging-log4j2/blob/7f29dbf2/src/site/xdoc/manual/garbagefree.xml
----------------------------------------------------------------------
diff --git a/src/site/xdoc/manual/garbagefree.xml b/src/site/xdoc/manual/garbagefree.xml
index aaaf054..ab5045c 100644
--- a/src/site/xdoc/manual/garbagefree.xml
+++ b/src/site/xdoc/manual/garbagefree.xml
@@ -440,20 +440,17 @@ public void garbageFree() {
<p><img src="../images/ResponseTimeSyncClassicVsGcFree.png" /></p>
<a name="Throughput" />
- <h4>Throughput of Garbage-free and Classic Logging is Similar</h4>
- <p>Throughput is roughly similar for garbage-free and classic logging.
- In our measurements, Log4j 2.6 in garbage-free mode had the highest throughput in single-threaded scenarios. In multi-threaded
- scenarios, Log4j 2.6 "classic" had the highest throughput, with Log4j 2.6 in garbage-free mode and Log4j 2.5
- not far behind.</p>
- <p>The synchronous logging throughput results below are obtained with the
+ <h4>Classic Logging has Slightly Higher Throughput</h4>
+ <p>Throughput is slightly higher for classic logging than for garbage-free logging.
+ This is true for both synchronous and asynchronous logging.
+ Garbage-free logging throughput is roughly similar to the throughput of Log4j 2.5.
+ The graph below compares the sustained throughput of synchronous logging to a file with Log4j 2.6 in
+ garbage-free mode, classic mode and Log4j 2.5.</p>
+ <p>The results below are obtained with the
<a href="http://openjdk.java.net/projects/code-tools/jmh/">JMH</a> Java benchmark harness.
See the <tt>org.apache.logging.log4j.perf.jmh.FileAppenderBenchmark</tt> source code in the log4j-perf module.</p>
<p><img src="../images/garbage-free2.6-SyncThroughputLinux.png"
alt="Throughput of Log4j 2.6 in garbage-free mode is slightly worse than in classic mode, but on par with 2.5 and much better than alternatives logging libraries" /></p>
- <p>(TODO: DOUBLE-CHECK) The above results are for <em>synchronous</em> logging. For <em>asynchronous</em> logging,
- there was no measurable difference in throughput between
- Log4j 2.6 in garbage-free mode and Log4j 2.6 in "classic" mode (allocating
- new objects on every logging call).</p>
</subsection>
<a name="UnderTheHood" />
<subsection name="Under the Hood">