2
\$\begingroup\$

I have this code to get the current Timestamp and compute the last timestamp's difference with the current timestamp in minutes. I'm wondering if this can be optimized further for production.

public static Timestamp getTimestamp() {
 java.util.Date date= new java.util.Date(); 
 long time = date.getTime(); 
 java.sql.Timestamp ts = new java.sql.Timestamp(time);
 return ts;
}
public static long getLastTimestampElapse(java.sql.Timestamp oldTime){
 long milliseconds1 = oldTime.getTime();
 long milliseconds2 = getTimestamp().getTime();
 long diff = milliseconds2 - milliseconds1; 
 long diffMinutes = diff / (60 * 1000); 
 return diffMinutes;
}
Jamal
35.2k13 gold badges134 silver badges238 bronze badges
asked Mar 14, 2019 at 16:36
\$\endgroup\$

1 Answer 1

4
\$\begingroup\$

Note that none of these suggestions will have any significant impact on the performance of your application overall. Don't micro-optimize performance until you have known, tested bottlenecks.

The getTimestamp() method is noise. If all you care about is the current timestamp in milliseconds, use System.currentTimeMillis().

You can use a constant to store the number of milliseconds in a minute, potentially saving the multiplication. Even if the compiler optimizes the math away, it's easier to read.

A java.sql.Timestamp is a kind of java.util.Date, and the getTime() method is defined there. Your method should accept a java.util.Date to support more clients at no cost.

Your method is poorly named. Something like getMinutesSince() would be more readable. Likewise, there are better variable names than what you've selected.

Use final to indicate that variables won't be reassigned. That reduces the cognitive load on the reader.

You don't really need as many variables as you have. You might even be able to get away with none and still have a reasonably clear method.

If you were to use all my suggestions, your code might look more like:

private static final long MILLISECONDS_PER_MINUTE = 60 * 1000;
public static long getMinutesSince(final java.util.Date startTime) {
 final long millisecondsSinceStart =
 System.currentTimeMillis() - startTime.getTime();
 return millisecondsSinceStart / MILLISECONDS_PER_MINUTE;
}
answered Mar 14, 2019 at 18:31
\$\endgroup\$
4
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ You might want to assign MILLISECONDS_PER_MINUTE to something. :-) \$\endgroup\$ Commented Mar 14, 2019 at 23:51
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS.toMinutes(millisecondsSinceStart) - TimeUnit already has constants for you \$\endgroup\$ Commented Mar 15, 2019 at 3:33
  • \$\begingroup\$ @AJNeufeld That's what I get for editing directly in the window instead of moving to my editor. Fixed, thanks! \$\endgroup\$ Commented Mar 15, 2019 at 13:10
  • \$\begingroup\$ @AlexeyRagozin That's a good point. I personally find it harder to read in this case, but it's a good option for the OP to be aware of. Thanks! \$\endgroup\$ Commented Mar 15, 2019 at 13:11

Your Answer

Draft saved
Draft discarded

Sign up or log in

Sign up using Google
Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Required, but never shown

Post as a guest

Required, but never shown

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.