[concurrency-interest] ConcurrentLinkedBlockingQueue vs LinkedBlockingQueue

Peter Kovacs peter.kovacs.1.0rc at gmail.com
Mon Apr 2 09:02:21 EDT 2007


Hi,

Dual Xeon, Windows Server 2003:

java version "1.5.0_06"
Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition (build 1.5.0_06-b05)
Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM (build 1.5.0_06-b05, mixed mode)
-------------------------------
LBQ/CLBQ: 0.798385
-------------------------------

java version "1.6.0_01"
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.6.0_01-b06)
Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM (build 1.6.0_01-b06, mixed mode, sharing)
-------------------------------
LBQ/CLBQ: 1.68951
-------------------------------

Full log files attached.

Should the "-server" switch not have been specified?

Thanks
Peter


On 4/2/07, Hanson Char <hanson.char at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Note that Hanson's
> > ConcurrentLinkedBlockingQueue performs good as well, in fact, I think,
> > it performs slightly better than the LinkedBlockingQueue.
>
> Based on a recent test on Windows XP Professional with 1 CPU,
> ConcurrentLinkedBlockingQueue performs 83% faster than
> LinkedBlockingQueue.  Unfortunately I don't have access to a more
> powerful box (with multi-processors) to do more testings.
>
> If anyone does and is interested in the comparison, please download
> the jar from:
>
>     http://beanlib.sourceforge.net/clbq/070401/q-test.jar
>
> and run (using jdk6 or jdk5):
>
> java -XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC -XX:+CMSIncrementalMode
> -XX:+DisableExplicitGC -jar q-test.jar
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> (Only if I could gain access to a powerful box with jdk6 installed for
> 5 minutes!)
>
> Hanson Char
>
> PS:
>
> 1) The source jar of the test harness can be downloaded from
> http://beanlib.sourceforge.net/clbq/070401/q-test-sources.jar
> 2) Note the test is based on the SVN revision 168 of
> ConcurrentLinkedBlockingQueue.java at
> http://svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/*checkout*/beanlib/trunk/beanlib/src/net/sf/beanlib/util/concurrent/ConcurrentLinkedBlockingQueue.java?revision=168
> 3) I inadvertently introduced a serious flaw in revision 166.  My apology.
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: q-clbq-xeon-java5.log
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 8999 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20070402/104111ab/attachment-0002.obj 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: q-clbq-xeon-java6.log
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 8955 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20070402/104111ab/attachment-0003.obj 


More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list