I will prepare detailed statistics tonight. The statistic bellow was from "dirty" environment (eclipse, another processes working, etc.).
Thanks, Piotr Carlos Sanchez pisze: > I have seen other caching problems when using the embedder, like > plugin versions not updated if the pom changes. I would go for > correctness first and speed second > > On 7/12/07, John Casey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> So, if we don't ever cache the plugin container, it's a 2-second >> penalty on a single project using debug output with corrected algorithm? >> >> -john >> >> >> On Jul 12, 2007, at 11:29 AM, Piotr Tabor wrote: >> >> > John Casey pisze: >> >> While #3 might have the best performance in terms of speed, I really >> >> wonder about memory performance. Leaving all those old antrun plugin >> >> instances laying around but still reachable means that in very large >> >> projects that use antrun, we'll have some pretty significant memory >> >> problems. If you determine that the plugin+dependencies doesn't fit >> >> the current requirement, then what's the point in keeping it around? >> > We can use LRU cache if we afraid of memory. >> > >> > The running times are: >> > 12 secunds with -X option for the "integration-test" with >> > current "error" >> > 15 secunds with -X option for the removing not matching >> > (pluginDescriptor) and putting new one into the cache >> > 17 secunds with -X option without cashing commented >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Piotr >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > >> >> --- >> John Casey >> Committer and PMC Member, Apache Maven >> mail: jdcasey at commonjava dot org >> blog: http://www.ejlife.net/blogs/john >> >> >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
