Java IO Faster Than NIO

rsk writes "Paul Tyma, the man behind Mailinator, has put together an excellent performance analysis comparing old-school synchronous programming (java.io.*) to Java's asynchronous programming (java.nio.*) — showing a consistent 25% performance deficiency with the asynchronous code. As it turns out, old-style blocking I/O with modern threading libraries like Linux NPTL and multi-core machines gives you idle-thread and non-contending thread management for an extremely low cost; less than it takes to switch-and-restore connection state constantly with a selector approach."

Comments

Waiting for JDK 7

[Anonymous Coward]

JDK7 will bring a new IO API that underneath uses epoll (Linux) or completion port (Windows). High performance servers will be possible in Java too.

Old news.

[Cyberax]

Look at the timestamp of this presentation :) It's a bit of old news.

It was discussed here: http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=48449

And it mostly shows that NIO is deficient. I encountered similar problems in my tests. Solved them by using http://mina.apache.org/ .

Re:And this is news?

[HFXPro]

Except NIO is usually not as straight forward as java io. It isn't particular hard to use either if you learn to use threads to handle the I/O and pass information through queues.

Re:And this is news?

[ShadowRangerRIT]

.COM languages? You mean a web language? You do realize Perl was written as a replacement for sed, awk and the shell languages (csh, bash, etc.), to make systems administration easier by providing a single language that used a familiar, C-like syntax and made text parsing trivial. The web was a non-entity when Perl was created. The fact that it was an acceptable language for web development is tied to the initial design goal of parsing text quickly, but that was never the purpose of Perl, and the spread of the language was not solely (and not even primarily) due to its use on the web.