2012/12/12 Igor Fedorenko :
>
>
> On 2012-12-12 11:35 AM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
>>
>> Does that mean m2e ditches the container every now and then?
>>
>
> No. m2e keeps the same container but injects its own cache
> implementations that allows purging project-specific cache entries
> whenever wo
Am 12/12/12 08:23, schrieb Milos Kleint:
> how much memory will be freed by the soft reference? if it's not a big
> chunk, most likely not worth it, soft references are released only
> when your VM is really, really in trouble. by the time it gets
> released, you've been slowed down by repeatedly h
On Dec 12, 2012, at 12:09 PM, Igor Fedorenko wrote:
>
>
> On 2012-12-12 11:35 AM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
>> Does that mean m2e ditches the container every now and then?
>>
>
> No. m2e keeps the same container but injects its own cache
> implementations that allows purging project-specific
On 2012-12-12 11:35 AM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
Does that mean m2e ditches the container every now and then?
No. m2e keeps the same container but injects its own cache
implementations that allows purging project-specific cache entries
whenever workspace project is re-read or removed from w
In embedded mode the ITs were failing without the change. I can't remember what
you were looking at but what problem is it causing?
jvz
On 2012-12-12, at 11:35 AM, Kristian Rosenvold
wrote:
> Does that mean m2e ditches the container every now and then?
>
> In that case the whole unloading j
Does that mean m2e ditches the container every now and then?
In that case the whole unloading jason implemented can be reverted...?
K
Den 12. des. 2012 kl. 16:44 skrev Igor Fedorenko :
> For tests, I think the easiest is to check number of realms at the end
> of each test and drop plexus contai
For tests, I think the easiest is to check number of realms at the end
of each test and drop plexus container if it grew over certain number of
realms. Pick the number large enough to fit in 128M of permgen and I
think this will provide good tradeoff between performance and memory
usage. This does
I'll let folks focus on their evaluations and I'll work on the sample plugins
and classloader isolation.
On Dec 12, 2012, at 9:23 AM, Stephen Connolly
wrote:
> On Wednesday, 12 December 2012, Daniel Kulp wrote:
>
>>
>> On Dec 12, 2012, at 8:45 AM, Stephen Connolly <
>> stephen.alan.conno...@
On Wednesday, 12 December 2012, Daniel Kulp wrote:
>
> On Dec 12, 2012, at 8:45 AM, Stephen Connolly <
> stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com > wrote:
>
> > Another criteria that people should pay attention to is whether the
> > implementation supports Mapped Diagnostic Contexts
> > http://logback.qos.
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Stephen Connolly <
stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Another criteria that people should pay attention to is whether the
> implementation supports Mapped Diagnostic Contexts
> http://logback.qos.ch/manual/mdc.html
>
> AFAIU this may rule out JUL as a seriou
On Dec 12, 2012, at 8:45 AM, Stephen Connolly
wrote:
> Another criteria that people should pay attention to is whether the
> implementation supports Mapped Diagnostic Contexts
> http://logback.qos.ch/manual/mdc.html
>
> AFAIU this may rule out JUL as a serious implementation... In other words
Another criteria that people should pay attention to is whether the
implementation supports Mapped Diagnostic Contexts
http://logback.qos.ch/manual/mdc.html
AFAIU this may rule out JUL as a serious implementation... In other words
when we want to start using MDCs to make it easier to navigate the
Another criteria that people should pay attention to is whether the
implementation supports Mapped Diagnostic Contexts
http://logback.qos.ch/manual/mdc.html
AFAIU this may rule out JUL as a serious implementation... In other words
when we want to start using MDCs to make it easier to navigate the
I ran the CXF build like:
mvn -Pfastinstall -T8 -o
using the latest on the two branches as of 11pm last night:
3.0.4: 1:16
log4j2: 1:12
logback: 1:19
Ran each 3 times and results were fairly consistent.Thus, for me using
parallel builds, log4j2 is the fastest, but the difference is alm
The idea behind these binaries is to give everyone the opportunity to make
decisions with regards to the technical gates:
1. Does it pass the integration tests
2. Is it roughly equivalent in terms of performance to 3.0.4 (can be better
or up to say 5% worse)
There are additional criteria people c
I have built some binaries for people to play with:
http://people.apache.org/~stephenc/
MD5 (apache-maven-3.1.0-pre-jul.tar.gz) = dd40afbfa64ab53f614ede19385e4a48
MD5 (apache-maven-3.1.0-pre-jul.zip) = 731fe7136e96e2027d145d993d917f20
MD5 (apache-maven-3.1.0-pre-log4j.tar.gz) = 63fead6accb60ca52c
I am working on getting some branches for different options.
I think I have the logging/slf4j-jul branch done...
I think my logging/slf4j-log4j2 branch is correct
I am fairly certain my logging/slf4j-logback branch is correct
My logging/slf4j-log4j (i.e. 1.2) branch needs some tweaks
If somebo
oups it looks to be a log4j 1.2 based branch.
sorry for noise.
2012/12/12 Olivier Lamy :
> note you must use %p{WARN=WARNING}
> by default as slf4j-simple, log4j2 use WARN instead of WARNING.
> It's just to prevent change in log output (and help it to pass as
> there is an it which use the WARNING
note you must use %p{WARN=WARNING}
by default as slf4j-simple, log4j2 use WARN instead of WARNING.
It's just to prevent change in log output (and help it to pass as
there is an it which use the WARNING to verify logs content).
log4j2 community add this feature recently as I was complaining :-)
(htt
I only do those benchmarks on a desktop linux box with the cpu governer set to
a fixed frequency.
Imo that's the only way to get reproducible numbers.
Especially when working on a notebook it also depends how much heat the
notebook can dissipate. I've seen my MBP not using his full turbo when he
Can we get a set of baseline git hashes for any versions of maven that we
are comparing. I might see if I can pull logback out of the latest RC and
put log4j2 and some other impls in its place so we can get some real apples
for apples comparisons going
On 12 December 2012 08:35, Kristian Rosenvol
Yeah, measuring performance on modern cpu's is totally borked. To get
any real measurements one probably needs to to average of 100 non-stop
builds or similar, to counter for all the dark magics intel do with
temperature-based overclocking.
I think I've seen somewhere that it's possible to disable
2012/12/12 Milos Kleint :
> how much memory will be freed by the soft reference? if it's not a big
> chunk, most likely not worth it, soft references are released only
> when your VM is really, really in trouble. by the time it gets
> released, you've been slowed down by repeatedly hitting the ceil
Oh - FWIW I'm running on OSX 10.7.5 with a 2.5 GHz Intel Core i7 with 16GB of
memory.
Ralph
On Dec 12, 2012, at 12:27 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
> I checked out Maven and used its build as a comparison. First, I ran the
> log4j 2 build and it was taking around 59 seconds. I then changed the
>
I checked out Maven and used its build as a comparison. First, I ran the log4j
2 build and it was taking around 59 seconds. I then changed the log4j2.xml to
remove the colors. I then got an average time for Log4j 2 of 54.76s and for
Logback I get an average of 55.225s. I consider these diff
25 matches
Mail list logo
