KAFKA-17023: add PCollectionsImmutableMap to ConcurrentMapBenchmark

[TaiJuWu]

*More detailed description of your change,
Add SingleWriteMultiReadBenchmark for ConcurrentHashMap, CopyOnWriteMap, PcollectionsImmutableMap

Running Command:
./jmh-benchmarks/jmh.sh org.apache.kafka.jmh.util.SingleWriteMultiReadBenchmar

Test result:

Benchmark                                                                                     (mapSize)  (writePercentage)  Mode  Cnt      Score       Error  Units
SingleWriteMultiReadBenchmark.ConcurrentHashMap                                                     100                0.1  avgt    5   5551.856 ±  5184.034  ns/op
SingleWriteMultiReadBenchmark.ConcurrentHashMap:testConcurrentHashMapEntry                          100                0.1  avgt    5  12631.454 ± 11665.343  ns/op
SingleWriteMultiReadBenchmark.ConcurrentHashMap:testConcurrentHashMapGet                            100                0.1  avgt    5     50.020 ±    51.794  ns/op
SingleWriteMultiReadBenchmark.ConcurrentHashMap:testConcurrentHashMapRandomGet                      100                0.1  avgt    5     82.140 ±   111.144  ns/op
SingleWriteMultiReadBenchmark.ConcurrentHashMap:testConcurrentHashMapValues                         100                0.1  avgt    5   9998.994 ±  9485.352  ns/op
SingleWriteMultiReadBenchmark.ConcurrentHashMap:testConcurrentHashMapWrite                          100                0.1  avgt    5     ≈ 10⁻⁴              ns/op
SingleWriteMultiReadBenchmark.CopyOnWriteMap                                                        100                0.1  avgt    5   3571.190 ±  2335.478  ns/op
SingleWriteMultiReadBenchmark.CopyOnWriteMap:testCopyOnWriteMapEntry                                100                0.1  avgt    5   8741.245 ±  5825.625  ns/op
SingleWriteMultiReadBenchmark.CopyOnWriteMap:testCopyOnWriteMapGet                                  100                0.1  avgt    5     43.997 ±    27.091  ns/op
SingleWriteMultiReadBenchmark.CopyOnWriteMap:testCopyOnWriteMapRandomGet                            100                0.1  avgt    5     72.952 ±    69.792  ns/op
SingleWriteMultiReadBenchmark.CopyOnWriteMap:testCopyOnWriteMapValues                               100                0.1  avgt    5   5783.686 ±  3656.257  ns/op
SingleWriteMultiReadBenchmark.CopyOnWriteMap:testCopyOnWriteMapWrite                                100                0.1  avgt    5      0.001 ±     0.008  ns/op
SingleWriteMultiReadBenchmark.PcollectionsImmutableMap                                              100                0.1  avgt    5   5529.729 ±  1322.872  ns/op
SingleWriteMultiReadBenchmark.PcollectionsImmutableMap:testPcollectionsImmutableMapEntry            100                0.1  avgt    5   9151.719 ±  3652.206  ns/op
SingleWriteMultiReadBenchmark.PcollectionsImmutableMap:testPcollectionsImmutableMapGet              100                0.1  avgt    5    202.152 ±    85.313  ns/op
SingleWriteMultiReadBenchmark.PcollectionsImmutableMap:testPcollectionsImmutableMapRandomGet        100                0.1  avgt    5    320.565 ±    89.311  ns/op
SingleWriteMultiReadBenchmark.PcollectionsImmutableMap:testPcollectionsImmutableMapValues           100                0.1  avgt    5  12997.451 ±  2356.417  ns/op
SingleWriteMultiReadBenchmark.PcollectionsImmutableMap:testPcollectionsImmutableMapWrite            100                0.1  avgt    5      0.001 ±     0.004  ns/op

*Summary of testing strategy (including rationale)

Committer Checklist (excluded from commit message)

• Verify design and implementation
• Verify test coverage and CI build status
• Verify documentation (including upgrade notes)

[chia7712]

@TaiJuWu thanks for patch!

[chia7712]

@TaiJuWu thanks for this benchmark

[chia7712]

@TaiJuWu It seems copyOnWrite has better performance overall?

[TaiJuWu]

@TaiJuWu It seems copyOnWrite has better performance overall?

Yes, using copyOnWrite can get better performance than others according the benchmark.

[chia7712]

Yes, using copyOnWrite can get better performance than others according the benchmark.

please take a look at the use case of acl cache. that will be a good start