I was testing on Mac OS X and the bottleneck was "digest", not
"sleep". In any event this is moot now, as I removed "sleep" and
"digest" as they are not needed for this particular case. CVS version
(check the latest nightly build) doesn't have this bottleneck anymore.
Andrus
On Feb 5, 2006, at 4:13 PM, Ingo Feulner wrote:
> one of the reasons for the bad performance of the first
> implementation is the use of Thread.sleep(1).
> The spec only gurantees a delay for AT LEAST the given period. But
> most VM implementations of Thread.sleep are working only
> with an accuracy of 10ms... depending on the systems settings and
> according to our Sun consultant it is even worse on Sun machines
> (up to 50ms).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Sun Feb 05 2006 - 16:17:31 EST