CODEWITHSUNDEEP
javagarbage-collectionpacked
NHSH
NHSH

Reputation: 89

Creating new objects versus encoding data in primitives

Let's assume I want to store (integer) x/y-values, what is considered more efficient: Storing it in a primitive value like long (which fits perfect, due sizeof(long) = 2*sizeof(int)) using bit-operations like shift, or and a mask, or creating a Point-Class?

Keep in mind that I want to create and store many(!) of these points (in a loop). Would be there a perfomance issue when using classes? The only reason I would prefer storing in primtives over storing in class is the garbage-collector. I guess generating new objects in a loop would trigger the gc way too much, is it correct?

Upvotes: 2

Views: 77

Answers (1)

Eugene
Eugene

Reputation: 120848

Of course packing those as long[] is going to take less memory (though it is going to be contiguous). For each Object (a Point) you will pay at least 12 bytes more for the two headers.

On other hand, if you are creating them in a loop and thus escape analysis can prove they don't escape, it can apply an optimization called "scalar replacement" (thought is it very fragile); where your Objects will not be allocated at all. Instead those objects will be "desugared" to fields.

The general rule is that you should code the way it is the most easy to maintain and read that code. If and only if you see performance issues (via a profiler let's say or too many pauses), only then you should look at GC logs and potentially optimize code.

As an addendum, jdk code itself is full of such long where each bit means different things - so they do pack them. But then, me and I doubt you, are jdk developers. There such things matter, for us - I have serious doubts.

Upvotes: 3

Related Questions