Optimize Scannable#name() and related logic
#3901
Open
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This logic may be executed many times, e.g. if a hot code path uses
`{Mono,Flux}#log` or Micrometer instrumentation. The added benchmark
shows that for large stack traces the new implementation is several
orders of magnitude more efficient in terms of compute and memory
resource utilization.
While there, improve two existing benchmarks by utilizing the black hole
to which benchmark method return values are implicitly sent.
Stephan202
commented
Oct 3, 2024
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Added some comments with context. This PR relates to #3900.
Comment on lines
+52
to
+53
| public Boolean measureThroughput() { | ||
| return Flux.range(0, rangeSize) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Here and in MonoCallableBenchmark: as stated, these are unrelated improvements. Can be pulled into a separate PR if desired.
Comment on lines
+33
to
+39
| @BenchmarkMode({Mode.AverageTime}) | ||
| @Warmup(iterations = 5, time = 5, timeUnit = TimeUnit.SECONDS) | ||
| @Measurement(iterations = 5, time = 5, timeUnit = TimeUnit.SECONDS) | ||
| @Fork(value = 1) | ||
| @OutputTimeUnit(TimeUnit.NANOSECONDS) | ||
| @State(Scope.Benchmark) | ||
| public class TracesBenchmark { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The configuration and setup for this benchmark match those of the existing benchmarks, including explicit specification of default parameters. Can be cleaned up a bit more if desired.
As for the impact of this PR, the following shows the before- and after output of ./gradlew jmh --include="TracesBenchmark" --profilers="gc":
Before:
Benchmark (reactorLeadingLines) (trailingLines) Mode Cnt Score Error Units
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 0 0 avgt 5 93.082 ± 5.671 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 0 0 avgt 5 8607.367 ± 515.275 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 0 0 avgt 5 840.000 ± 0.001 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 0 0 avgt 5 117.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 0 0 avgt 5 153.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 0 10 avgt 5 398.660 ± 16.663 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 0 10 avgt 5 7081.158 ± 294.949 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 0 10 avgt 5 2960.001 ± 0.001 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 0 10 avgt 5 96.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 0 10 avgt 5 124.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 0 100 avgt 5 2999.075 ± 89.655 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 0 100 avgt 5 7364.662 ± 220.010 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 0 100 avgt 5 23160.019 ± 0.001 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 0 100 avgt 5 100.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 0 100 avgt 5 131.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 0 1000 avgt 5 27916.269 ± 1601.038 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 0 1000 avgt 5 7751.034 ± 442.501 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 0 1000 avgt 5 226865.228 ± 0.070 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 0 1000 avgt 5 105.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 0 1000 avgt 5 133.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 10 0 avgt 5 402.076 ± 11.693 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 10 0 avgt 5 7476.144 ± 216.947 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 10 0 avgt 5 3152.001 ± 0.001 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 10 0 avgt 5 102.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 10 0 avgt 5 131.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 10 10 avgt 5 626.244 ± 31.574 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 10 10 avgt 5 8053.582 ± 403.074 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 10 10 avgt 5 5288.002 ± 0.001 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 10 10 avgt 5 109.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 10 10 avgt 5 140.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 10 100 avgt 5 3331.927 ± 253.038 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 10 100 avgt 5 7608.535 ± 564.012 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 10 100 avgt 5 26576.019 ± 0.001 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 10 100 avgt 5 104.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 10 100 avgt 5 137.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 10 1000 avgt 5 27321.302 ± 1180.729 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 10 1000 avgt 5 7992.724 ± 345.188 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 10 1000 avgt 5 228969.037 ± 0.044 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 10 1000 avgt 5 109.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 10 1000 avgt 5 140.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 100 0 avgt 5 3119.034 ± 70.765 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 100 0 avgt 5 7555.751 ± 170.859 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 100 0 avgt 5 24712.018 ± 0.001 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 100 0 avgt 5 102.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 100 0 avgt 5 131.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 100 10 avgt 5 3384.598 ± 134.383 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 100 10 avgt 5 7894.374 ± 310.075 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 100 10 avgt 5 28016.020 ± 0.001 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 100 10 avgt 5 107.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 100 10 avgt 5 141.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 100 100 avgt 5 5920.906 ± 192.896 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 100 100 avgt 5 7678.427 ± 250.022 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 100 100 avgt 5 47672.060 ± 0.002 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 100 100 avgt 5 104.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 100 100 avgt 5 141.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 100 1000 avgt 5 28805.156 ± 1329.846 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 100 1000 avgt 5 8211.734 ± 378.784 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 100 1000 avgt 5 248017.124 ± 0.052 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 100 1000 avgt 5 111.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 100 1000 avgt 5 147.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 1000 0 avgt 5 27765.904 ± 1098.007 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 1000 0 avgt 5 8341.364 ± 333.465 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 1000 0 avgt 5 242849.078 ± 0.042 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 1000 0 avgt 5 113.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 1000 0 avgt 5 145.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 1000 10 avgt 5 28772.385 ± 1965.006 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 1000 10 avgt 5 8115.825 ± 550.707 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 1000 10 avgt 5 244809.121 ± 0.076 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 1000 10 avgt 5 111.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 1000 10 avgt 5 145.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 1000 100 avgt 5 31094.765 ± 1220.979 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 1000 100 avgt 5 8049.444 ± 315.635 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 1000 100 avgt 5 262450.032 ± 0.080 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 1000 100 avgt 5 109.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 1000 100 avgt 5 142.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 1000 1000 avgt 5 55008.078 ± 3723.012 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 1000 1000 avgt 5 8252.861 ± 557.526 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 1000 1000 avgt 5 475940.138 ± 0.280 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 1000 1000 avgt 5 112.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 1000 1000 avgt 5 148.000 ms
After
Benchmark (reactorLeadingLines) (trailingLines) Mode Cnt Score Error Units
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 0 0 avgt 5 28.283 ± 2.319 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 0 0 avgt 5 12142.383 ± 996.110 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 0 0 avgt 5 360.000 ± 0.001 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 0 0 avgt 5 165.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 0 0 avgt 5 218.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 0 10 avgt 5 48.606 ± 4.176 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 0 10 avgt 5 11305.217 ± 943.994 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 0 10 avgt 5 576.000 ± 0.001 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 0 10 avgt 5 154.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 0 10 avgt 5 211.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 0 100 avgt 5 47.248 ± 2.156 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 0 100 avgt 5 11626.888 ± 524.566 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 0 100 avgt 5 576.000 ± 0.001 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 0 100 avgt 5 158.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 0 100 avgt 5 204.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 0 1000 avgt 5 47.641 ± 4.503 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 0 1000 avgt 5 11535.133 ± 1068.897 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 0 1000 avgt 5 576.002 ± 0.001 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 0 1000 avgt 5 157.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 0 1000 avgt 5 199.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 10 0 avgt 5 47.941 ± 1.134 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 10 0 avgt 5 10821.406 ± 255.277 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 10 0 avgt 5 544.000 ± 0.001 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 10 0 avgt 5 147.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 10 0 avgt 5 182.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 10 10 avgt 5 48.681 ± 3.065 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 10 10 avgt 5 10658.850 ± 672.502 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 10 10 avgt 5 544.000 ± 0.001 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 10 10 avgt 5 145.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 10 10 avgt 5 189.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 10 100 avgt 5 48.309 ± 3.576 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 10 100 avgt 5 10741.652 ± 778.802 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 10 100 avgt 5 544.000 ± 0.001 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 10 100 avgt 5 147.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 10 100 avgt 5 202.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 10 1000 avgt 5 46.582 ± 2.587 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 10 1000 avgt 5 11138.595 ± 611.256 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 10 1000 avgt 5 544.002 ± 0.001 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 10 1000 avgt 5 152.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 10 1000 avgt 5 202.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 100 0 avgt 5 46.127 ± 2.642 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 100 0 avgt 5 11248.700 ± 638.495 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 100 0 avgt 5 544.000 ± 0.001 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 100 0 avgt 5 153.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 100 0 avgt 5 201.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 100 10 avgt 5 46.186 ± 2.518 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 100 10 avgt 5 11234.035 ± 610.123 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 100 10 avgt 5 544.000 ± 0.001 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 100 10 avgt 5 153.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 100 10 avgt 5 199.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 100 100 avgt 5 48.736 ± 1.891 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 100 100 avgt 5 10645.285 ± 416.594 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 100 100 avgt 5 544.000 ± 0.001 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 100 100 avgt 5 145.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 100 100 avgt 5 185.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 100 1000 avgt 5 46.312 ± 2.365 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 100 1000 avgt 5 11203.368 ± 573.569 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 100 1000 avgt 5 544.002 ± 0.001 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 100 1000 avgt 5 152.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 100 1000 avgt 5 198.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 1000 0 avgt 5 46.600 ± 2.220 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 1000 0 avgt 5 11133.818 ± 527.892 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 1000 0 avgt 5 544.002 ± 0.001 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 1000 0 avgt 5 152.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 1000 0 avgt 5 201.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 1000 10 avgt 5 45.805 ± 1.806 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 1000 10 avgt 5 11326.617 ± 446.037 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 1000 10 avgt 5 544.002 ± 0.001 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 1000 10 avgt 5 154.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 1000 10 avgt 5 206.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 1000 100 avgt 5 48.450 ± 2.778 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 1000 100 avgt 5 10709.195 ± 616.791 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 1000 100 avgt 5 544.003 ± 0.001 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 1000 100 avgt 5 145.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 1000 100 avgt 5 191.000 ms
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput 1000 1000 avgt 5 51.759 ± 2.299 ns/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate 1000 1000 avgt 5 10023.884 ± 443.024 MB/sec
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.alloc.rate.norm 1000 1000 avgt 5 544.004 ± 0.001 B/op
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.count 1000 1000 avgt 5 136.000 counts
TracesBenchmark.measureThroughput:gc.time 1000 1000 avgt 5 174.000 ms
Note how performance of the new implementation is almost independent of the input, while the old implementation scales fairly poorly.
Comment on lines
59
to
60
| || stackTraceRow.startsWith("reactor.core.publisher.Mono.onAssembly") | ||
| || stackTraceRow.equals("reactor.core.publisher.Mono.onAssembly") | ||
| || stackTraceRow.equals("reactor.core.publisher.Flux.onAssembly") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This line removal is unrelated to the rest of the PR. The dropped line is redundant, as it is preceded by a predicate that matches in strictly more contexts. Question: should the Flux.onAssembly line (and some others below) be updated to also use startsWith?
| @@ -103,7 +102,7 @@ static String extractOperatorAssemblyInformation(String source) { | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| static boolean isUserCode(String line) { | |||
| return !line.startsWith("reactor.core.publisher") || line.contains("Test"); | |||
| return !line.startsWith(PUBLISHER_PACKAGE_PREFIX) || line.contains("Test"); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The constant has a trailing dot. Afaik that doesn't matter, as each line should include a class name, too.
Comment on lines
130
to
+131
| static String[] extractOperatorAssemblyInformationParts(String source) { | ||
| String[] uncleanTraces = source.split("\n"); | ||
| final List<String> traces = Stream.of(uncleanTraces) | ||
| .map(String::trim) | ||
| .filter(s -> !s.isEmpty()) | ||
| .collect(Collectors.toList()); | ||
| Iterator<String> traces = trimmedNonemptyLines(source); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The largest improvements in this PR come from these changes.
Key contributors to performance of the old implementation:
String#splitaccepts a regular expression. We're no longer performing the comparatively expensive operation of compiling regular expressions.String#splitallocates an array and substrings proportional to the provided input, covering a potentially large part of the input that does not at all influence the result of this method.- The
Streamoperation likewise processes irrelevant lines, and allocates a potentially large list.
The new implementation instead lazily iterates over the input, processing only relevant lines, and tracking only the two most-recently-seen lines.
Comment on lines
+140
to
143
| if (isUserCode(currentLine)) { | ||
| // No line is a Reactor API line. | ||
| return new String[]{currentLine}; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Some logic was moved around, but existing comments were relocated with it. This should aid review. It's nice that there was already good test coverage.
| else if (i == traces.size()) { | ||
| //we skipped ALL lines, meaning they're all reactor API lines. We'll fully display the last one | ||
| apiLine = ""; | ||
| userCodeLine = traces.get(i-1).replaceFirst("reactor.core.publisher.", ""); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Here and below: replaceFirst also accepts a regex. The new code instead performs a cheaper startsWith check.
Comment on lines
+172
to
+178
| /** | ||
| * Returns an iterator over all trimmed non-empty lines in the given source string. | ||
| * | ||
| * @implNote This implementation attempts to minimize allocations. | ||
| */ | ||
| private static Iterator<String> trimmedNonemptyLines(String source) { | ||
| return new Iterator<String>() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This manually-crafted iterator feels a bit like "coding like it's 1999", but I didn't find a less-verbose alternative that doesn't impact over-all code readability. (Had Guava been on the classpath, then I'd have opted to extend AbstractIterator.) Open to suggestions!
This was referenced Oct 3, 2024
|
Thanks for the PR. I will have a closer look. However, bear in mind this change won't make it into 3.7.0-RC1 but would target directly 3.7.0. I think that's ok as it's not an API change. Together with #3900 it is a behaviour change, but unless there were side effects in code they would also not be observed aside from the performance gains. I think it's worth noting some sort of warning for the |
(cherry picked from commit 009ec89)
Stephan202
changed the title
Traces#extractOperatorAssemblyInformationPartsScannable#name() and related logic
|
@chemicL I just realized that the impact of this PR is likely over-stated, as in practice the input stacktrace appears to always be generated by a So perhaps we can optimize the code further by skipping the intermediate single-string representation. I might have time for a closer look into that this weekend. |
There's one other code path:
I now have a POC for this locally. Against a (ReactorDebugAgent-using) benchmark of local code it isn't yet faster that the current PR (surprisingly; requires more investigation), but for the cleanest and likely fastest code, it'd be better if we can have |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Performance is improved in two ways:
Scannable#stepName()only whenAttr.NAMEis notexplicitly set.
Traces#extractOperatorAssemblyInformationParts, towhich several
Scannable#stepName()implementations delegate.The
Scannable#name()logic may be executed many times, e.g. if a hotcode path uses
{Mono,Flux}#logor Micrometer instrumentation. Theadded benchmark shows that for large stack traces, the new
Tracesimplementation is several orders of magnitude more efficient in terms of
compute and memory resource utilization.
Deferral of invocation of
Scannable#stepName()assumes that saidmethod does not have side-effects. This is true for all built-in
implementations.
While there, improve two existing benchmarks by utilizing the black hole
to which benchmark method return values are implicitly sent.