Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Will it be performant to use bufferedOutputStream in FilebackedOutputStream #3172

Open
kishorebattula opened this issue Jun 4, 2018 · 3 comments
Open

Will it be performant to use bufferedOutputStream in FilebackedOutputStream #3172

kishorebattula opened this issue Jun 4, 2018 · 3 comments
Assignees
@cgdecker
Labels
P4 package=io status=triaged type=performance Related to performance

Comments

@kishorebattula
Copy link

In FilebackedOutputStream we are using the following line
FileOutputStream transfer = new FileOutputStream(temp)
and we are using transfer.write to write bytes to this stream. Can we wrap FileOuputStream with bufferedOutputStream for better performance while writing?
Any thoughts on this?
@kluever kluever added type=enhancement Make an existing feature better status=triaged package=io labels Jun 4, 2018
@nikhilbarar
Copy link
Contributor

Any updates on this? Are we doing this?

@kevinb9n
Copy link
Contributor

Sorry, I misunderstood.

@kevinb9n kevinb9n reopened this Jun 13, 2018
@kevinb9n kevinb9n added type=performance Related to performance and removed status=working-as-intended type=enhancement Make an existing feature better labels Jun 13, 2018
@nikhilbarar
Copy link
Contributor

@kevinb9n Can i pick it? Do we have any performace tests available?

@raghsriniv raghsriniv added the P3 label Jun 24, 2019
@raghsriniv raghsriniv added P4 and removed P3 labels Jul 28, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@cgdecker cgdecker

Labels
P4 package=io status=triaged type=performance Related to performance
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
6 participants
@cgdecker @kevinb9n @kluever @raghsriniv @kishorebattula @nikhilbarar