import org.mockito.Mockito;

import jcifs.Address;
import jcifs.CIFSContext;
import jcifs.Configuration;
import jcifs.Credentials;
import jcifs.smb1.smb1.BufferCache;

/**
 * Comprehensive performance tests for critical performance fixes
 */
public class CriticalPerformanceTest {

    private CIFSContext mockContext;
    private Configuration mockConfig;
    private Credentials mockCredentials;

    @BeforeEach

Avec **FastAPI** vous aurez toutes les fonctionnalités de **Starlette** (FastAPI est juste Starlette sous stéroïdes):

* Des performances vraiment impressionnantes. C'est l'<a href="https://github.com/encode/starlette#performance" class="external-link" target="_blank">un des framework Python les plus rapide, à égalité avec **NodeJS** et **GO**</a>.
* Le support des **WebSockets**.
* Le support de **GraphQL**.

- **Switch Expressions** - Optimized implementations using switch expressions for better performance
- **Sequenced Collections** - Full support for Java 21 sequenced collections API with dedicated utility methods
- **Performance Focused** - Optimized implementations for better runtime performance with reduced memory allocation
- **Type Safe** - Comprehensive use of generics and modern Java type system features

 * application-specific ordering in addition to performing general cycle detection.
 *
 * <p><strong>Garbage Collection</strong>
 *
 * <p>In order to allow proper garbage collection of unused locks, the edges of the lock graph are
 * weak references.
 *
 * <p><strong>Performance</strong>
 *
 * <p>The extra bookkeeping done by cycle detecting locks comes at some cost to performance.
 * Benchmarks (as of December 2011) show that:

try:
    import orjson
except ImportError:  # pragma: nocover
    orjson = None  # type: ignore


class UJSONResponse(JSONResponse):
    """
    JSON response using the high-performance ujson library to serialize data to JSON.

    Read more about it in the
    [FastAPI docs for Custom Response - HTML, Stream, File, others](https://fastapi.tiangolo.com/advanced/custom-response/).
    """

Especificamente, observa-se Uvicorn, Starlette e FastAPI comparados juntos (entre muitas outras ferramentas).

Quanto mais simples o problema resolvido pela ferramenta, melhor a performance que ela terá. E a maioria dos _benchmarks_ não testam as características adicionais fornecidas pela ferramenta.

A hierarquia segue assim:

* **Uvicorn**: um servidor ASGI

                    fessConfig.getIndexFieldClickCount(), //
                    fessConfig.getIndexFieldFavoriteCount(), //
                    fessConfig.getIndexFieldLang());
            // Initialize Set for O(1) lookup performance
            searchFieldSet = new HashSet<>();
            Collections.addAll(searchFieldSet, searchFields);
        }
        if (facetFields == null) {

 * application-specific ordering in addition to performing general cycle detection.
 *
 * <p><strong>Garbage Collection</strong>
 *
 * <p>In order to allow proper garbage collection of unused locks, the edges of the lock graph are
 * weak references.
 *
 * <p><strong>Performance</strong>
 *
 * <p>The extra bookkeeping done by cycle detecting locks comes at some cost to performance.
 * Benchmarks (as of December 2011) show that:

Specifically, to see Uvicorn, Starlette and FastAPI compared together (among many other tools).

The simpler the problem solved by the tool, the better performance it will get. And most of the benchmarks don't test the additional features provided by the tool.

The hierarchy is like:

* **Uvicorn**: an ASGI server
    * **Starlette**: (uses Uvicorn) a web microframework

    }
    boolean[] octets = new boolean[maxChar + 1];
    for (char c : safeCharArray) {
      octets[c] = true;
    }
    return octets;
  }

  /*
   * Overridden for performance. For unescaped strings this improved the performance of the uri
   * escaper from ~760ns to ~400ns as measured by {@link CharEscapersBenchmark}.
   */
  @Override
  protected int nextEscapeIndex(CharSequence csq, int index, int end) {