495 had unfortunately introduced a bug[^1] in affinitycall's stream implementation which caused the backend to always use the slow fallback path (i.e. .collect().stream()). This is particularily slow for medium to large bounding boxes, as it will not use the preflight optimizations implemented for stream.
For example, this has the effect that with this version all ohsome-api data extractions are very slow.
[^1]: the concrete problem being that stream.toList() returns an immutable list which cannot be shuffled in the following code line, while the previously used stream.collect(Collectors.toList()) does return a mutable list (even though it does not guarantee the mutability of it, btw).
495 had unfortunately introduced a bug[^1] in affinitycall's stream implementation which caused the backend to always use the slow fallback path (i.e.
.collect().stream()). This is particularily slow for medium to large bounding boxes, as it will not use the preflight optimizations implemented forstream.For example, this has the effect that with this version all ohsome-api data extractions are very slow.
[^1]: the concrete problem being that
stream.toList()returns an immutable list which cannot be shuffled in the following code line, while the previously usedstream.collect(Collectors.toList())does return a mutable list (even though it does not guarantee the mutability of it, btw).Checklist
I have made corresponding changes to the documentationI have adjusted the examples or created an issue in the corresponding repositoryI have adjusted the benchmark or created an issue in the corresponding repository