[SNMP4J] SNMP4J on Java.net!

[Mathias Bogaert]

Frank,

Test it for yourself. Actually, Collections.synchronizedMap(new  
HashMap()) has different semantics than ConcurrentHashMap, so beware.

Cheers,

Mathias

On 21 Apr 2006, at 19:43, Frank Fock wrote:

> Hi Mathias,
>
> 30% is a strong figure. Is this really the overall performance
> improvement? I would guess that a speed improvement of about
> 3% from Hashtable to ConcurrentHashMap would be a lot.
> I thought SNMP4J does not spend that much time with Hashtables.
>
> If this is true, I should consider replacing Hashtable by
> Collections.synchronizedMap(new HashMap()).
>
> Any comments?
>
> Best regards,
> Frank
>
> Mathias Bogaert wrote:
>> Yes,
>> And the new concurrency API...I replaced Hashtable with  
>> ConcurrentHashMap
>> and got 30% better troughput.
>> Mathias
>>> Hi, what the main thing that java 1.5 improve
>>> Generics, autoboxing, annotations ? Something else ?
>>>
>>> Matthieu
>>>
>>> 2006/4/20, Mathias Bogaert <m.bogaert at memenco.com>:
>>>> Guys,
>>>>
>>>> I've imported SNMP4J 1.7 in the Java.net subversion. The idea is to
>>>> move SNMP4J to JDK 1.5 with the help of the community.
>>>>
>>>> If anyone wants to contribute, please join the project.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Mathias
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> SNMP4J mailing list
>>>> SNMP4J at agentpp.org
>>>> http://lists.agentpp.org/mailman/listinfo/snmp4j
>>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> SNMP4J mailing list
>> SNMP4J at agentpp.org
>> http://lists.agentpp.org/mailman/listinfo/snmp4j
>
> -- 
> AGENT++
> http://www.agentpp.com
> http://www.mibexplorer.com
> http://www.mibdesigner.com
>
>
>