2006/11/24, Alexey Petrenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
2006/11/24, Alexey Varlamov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > 2006/11/24, Alexey Petrenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > 23 Nov 2006 19:44:23 +0600, Egor Pasko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > On the 0x22A day of Apache Harmony Alexey Petrenko wrote: > > > > 2006/11/23, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > 23 Nov 2006 16:34:22 +0600, Egor Pasko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > On the 0x22A day of Apache Harmony Alexey Petrenko wrote: > > > > > > > 2006/11/23, Vladimir Strigun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > > On 23 Nov 2006 14:37:09 +0600, Egor Pasko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On the 0x22A day of Apache Harmony Vladimir Strigun wrote: > > > > > > > > > > The numbers that I published was received on P4 under Windows + > > > > > > > > > > server.emconf +Harmony-1980. Unfortunately I haven't run Dacapo under > > > > > > > > > > x86_64, but I hope we could receive almost the same range (10-20 % > > > > > > > > > > slower that Sun) with the mentioned configuration. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And Sun was running with "-server" too I guess? :) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, of course. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe, it is time to track performance comparisons of *different > > > > > > > > > platforms* in one place? That should help to avoid major differences in > > > > > > > > > our visions for harmony performance. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, good idea. Should we define the configuration for all VM's as well? > > > > > > > > For instance, for Sun we could use parameters from spec site. What do > > > > > > > > you think about it? > > > > > > > +1 for options from spec site. > > > > > > > > > > > > I am in love with it too. We could present results similar to how > > > > > > spec.org does. Just a list of runs. > > > > > > For each: > > > > > > * revision number > > > > > > * hardware/os summary (number of cores) > > > > > > * link to full details > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > * more? > > > > > > > > > > score? :) > > > > > > oops :) > > > > > > > Scores are most visible things but we can not easily publish them for > > > > all specs... > > > not allowed -> won't publish. We have great free benchmarks (thanks to > > > DaCapo guys!), they will give us a good picture. > > But I think that we should keep these (spec) benchmarks in mind and > > optimize Harmony for them. > For the *default* mode? No. For server mode.
Agree then, of course. I wonder most benchmarks will hardly conflict (significantly at least) on JIT optimization paths, so the more of them the better... Though GC requirements most probably is different story. BTW, pardon my silly question, what is the core difference between server and server_static configs?
SY, Alexey
