Re: Java 5

From: Mike Kienenberger (mkienen..mail.com)
Date: Mon Aug 06 2007 - 12:23:55 EDT

  • Next message: Mike Kienenberger: "Re: Arbitrary reverse relationship limitations"

    http://g.oswego.edu/dl/classes/EDU/oswego/cs/dl/util/concurrent/intro.html

    On 8/6/07, Craig L Russell <Craig.Russel..un.com> wrote:
    > I don't have details in front of me, but I understand that many of
    > the popular Concurrent classes have been back-ported to Java 1.4. If
    > you like, I can get more details if you can't find it on the Internet.
    >
    > The back-port classes don't use the new Java byte-codes that were
    > added in Java 5 so there still is some performance improvement in
    > Java 5. But if the alternative is to require Java 5, some users might
    > want to take a bit lower performance instead.
    >
    > Craig
    >
    > On Aug 6, 2007, at 8:19 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
    >
    > >
    > > On Aug 5, 2007, at 5:39 AM, Kevin Menard wrote:
    > >
    > >> the new concurrent API could yield significant speed improvements.
    > >
    > > Being all backwards compatible, I haven't played much with that,
    > > but I suspect that things like ConcurrentHashMap should help us to
    > > improve throughput of DataRowStore and EventManager. So I am
    > > softening my stand against 3.0 switch to Java 5 :-)
    > >
    > > Maybe a poll on the user list is a good idea?
    > >
    > > Andrus
    > >
    > >
    > >
    >
    > Craig Russell
    > Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
    > 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russel..un.com
    > P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
    >
    >
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Mon Aug 06 2007 - 12:24:23 EDT