Tag: Java Tips

  • Java Tip #2: Use StringBuilder for String concatenation

    And on to the next in a series of Java Tips. While last time the performance gain was very tiny and only affected high-load scenarios, this tip may considerably speed up even simple applications where there is String-processing involved.


    Advice

    Use StringBuilder instead of + or += to concatenate Strings in non-linear cases (when concatenation not appears immediately one after another), ie. in loops.

    Code-Example

    Before

      String test = "";
      for(int i = 0; i < 50000; i++) {
         test += "abc";
      }

    After

      StringBuilder test = new StringBuilder();
      for(int i = 0; i < 50000; i++) {
         test.append("abc");
      }

    Benefit

    Huge performance gain! The unoptimized code forces Java to create new Strings and copy the contents around all the time (because Strings are immutable in Java). The optimized code avoids this creation/copying by using StringBuilder. While the Java compiler can optimize linear concatenations, ie.

    String test = "a" + "b" + "c"; 

    into using a StringBuilder internally, it is not clever enough to apply this optimization correctly if there is more logic than just concatenation involved. Even if the concatenation is the only operation inside some loop-logic, the Java compiler falls back into creating a whole lot of String (or to be more exact: StringBuilder) objects, copying them around like crazy and causing a huge performance impact in some cases. I confirmed this example for measurement of StringBuilder performance: concatenating 50000 times "abc" in a loop takes ~11000ms, using StringBuilder keeps the time spent at near 0ms. (I tried concatenating with 500000 iterations, but stopped the execution of the first loop after ~10 minutes running unfinished, so the impact is nonlinear. Second loop finished in 15ms with 500000, for the record.)

    Remarks

    It is not necessary to optimize code like

    String email = user + "@" + domain + ".com"; 

    as javac is clever enough for these cases and it would reduce readability considerably. But even with the simplest loops involved the conditions change. For example, internally the first loop gets compiled by javac into following bytecode

     13  new java.lang.StringBuilder [24]
     16  dup
     17  aload_1 [test]
     18  invokestatic java.lang.String.valueOf(java.lang.Object) : java.lang.String [26]
     21  invokespecial java.lang.StringBuilder(java.lang.String) [32]
     24  ldc <String "abc"> [35]
     26  invokevirtual java.lang.StringBuilder.append(java.lang.String) : java.lang.StringBuilder [37]
     29  invokevirtual java.lang.StringBuilder.toString() : java.lang.String [41]
     32  astore_1 [test]
     33  iinc 4 1 [i]
     36  iload 4 [i]
     38  ldc <Integer 50000> [45]
     40  if_icmplt 13

    where for each iteration of the loop(13-40) a new StringBuilder is instantiated and initialized with the result of the previous’ loop StringBuilders value before appending the constant String just once each time. The optimized code results in this bytecode

     81  new java.lang.StringBuilder [24]
     84  dup
     85  invokespecial java.lang.StringBuilder() [62]
     88  astore 4 [builder]
     90  iconst_0
     91  istore 5 [i]
     93  goto 107
     96  aload 4 [builder]
     98  ldc <String "abc"> [35]
    100  invokevirtual java.lang.StringBuilder.append(java.lang.String) : java.lang.StringBuilder [37]
    103  pop
    104  iinc 5 1 [i]
    107  iload 5 [i]
    109  ldc <Integer 50000> [45]
    111  if_icmplt 96

    in which the loop(96-111) just appends the constant String to the same StringBuilder each time which was created only once before the loop started. No copying around and creation of additional objects necessary, thus a huge performance-gain.

  • Java Tip #1: Use StringBuilder instead of StringBuffer

    As promised last time I’m presenting here the first in a series of Java Tips. To start easy I’ll begin with one of the simplest tip to implement.


    Advice

    Use StringBuilder instead of StringBuffer.

    Code-Example

    Before

      StringBuffer str = new StringBuffer();
      str.append("foo");
      String x = str.toString();

    After

      StringBuilder str = new StringBuilder();
      str.append("foo");
      String x = str.toString();

    Benefit

    Small performance gain. StringBuilder is a 1:1 drop-in replacement for the StringBuffer class. The difference is that the StringBuilder is not thread synchronized and therefore performs better on most implementations of Java. Even javac internally translates String x = "foo" + "bar"; into a StringBuilder operation (confirmed with Java 1.6.0_18). A small testcase

    public static void main(String[] args) {
        long start = System.currentTimeMillis();
        StringBuffer buffer = new StringBuffer();
        for(int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++) {
            buffer.append("abc");
        }
        System.out.println("Time lapse using StringBuffer: " + (System.currentTimeMillis() - start) + " milliseconds");
    
        start = System.currentTimeMillis();
        StringBuilder builder = new StringBuilder();
        for(int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++) {
            builder.append("abc");
        }
        System.out.println("Time lapse using StringBuilder: " + (System.currentTimeMillis() - start) + " milliseconds");
    }

    using Java 1.6.0_18 shows that StringBuilder is roughly 100% faster than StringBuffer. Although on my machine this testcase keeps below 100ms for both with one million appends so this won’t be the magical solution for most of your performance issues.

    Remarks

    Even if this tip can be applied in 98% of all cases one has to be sure that the String is used afterwards and the StringBuilder instance does not get passed between several threads. Since StringBuilder is not thread-safe this would be the only case where StringBuffer should be used. And of course it’s not the silver performance bullet but just one slice in string-heavy applications.

  • Recovering slowly and preparing Java Tips

    Over the last ten (or so) days, just right for Easter, my health status went down again. I cought a small cold, not enough to keep me from working but bad enough so that I spent my non-work time in bed to recover faster. This helped somewhat in the way that it did not get worse anymore and today I’m not really feeling much of that issue anymore.

    But this recovering was paid expensive. My spine aces returned, most probably caused by the lying-in-bed and limited exercising because of my injured ankle. Currently it’s bad, not as bad as back in 2006, but still enough so that it causes me a constant pain in the lumbar spine. For now I just can fight this with pain killers but I know I need to get back to exercising as fast as possible to strengthen my muscles in this area again and get stabilized. Of course, I have to pay attention to the possible remainings of the cold and that I do nothing which could harm my wounded ankle.

    Totally unrelated to this, some time ago I began collecting the different improvements I make to our sourcecode at work. I did this because I recognized, that I often applied the same improvements over and over again to other people’s sourcecode and a lot of them are quite similar to each other. Most of this improvable code exists, because people just don’t know that similar functionality already exists in common frameworks and so algorithms and operations get reingeneered again and again.

    I plan to develop this collection so that each improvement has a before-after-example, a detailled explaination why this improvement is better, maybe a categorization into different areas (eg. Collections, Framework, Java5-Enhancement, etc.) and a difficulty-level. Maybe if this turns out well, I could also organize an internal training-event to spread this knowledge and raise the quality of our code just a tiny bit 🙂

    Nevertheless, I’m also thinking of publishing each tip here in the blog for free availability and open discussion, so stay tuned if you’re a Java developer, maybe there’s also something in for you.