On 12/1/06, Ivan Volosyuk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
They need to benchmark computational part. Benchmarking with IO are much more complex and not obvious to interpret. BTW, IO implementation in classlib is highly inefficient, see HARMONY-2288.
Ivan, would you please provide any simple benchmark test for Harmony-2288? :-) Thanks! --
Ivan On 11/29/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Sergey Kuksenko wrote: > > On 11/28/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> > > Re specjbb2005 : > > >> > >> No I/O? Concurrency? > > > > > > No. > > > > [SNIP] > > >> > >> That means the clients are in the same VM. No sockets or such? > > > > > > You are right. > > No sockets, the clients are in the same VM. > > > > [SNIP] > > >> > >> without I/O > > > > > > yes. > > > > Well, I guess they are modeling a very secure application server - no > data in or out :) > > [SNIP] > > >> > >> Do you have an idea of what %-age of workload processing in the test > >> suite is XML? > >> > > > > Below is SUN's (server) distribution on SPECjbb2005 shown using profiler. > > Garbage collection impact was not included into the data. > > Also the distribution below is shown accurately to methods inlining. > > > > > > > > > > impact > > > > spec.jbb.* classes > > > > 62.6% > > > > java.lang.* classes > > > > 9.2% > > > > java.math.* classes > > > > 6.8% > > > > XML classes > > > > 6.7% > > > > VM > > > > 7.4% > > > > java.util.* classes > > > > 3.9% > > > > UNKNOWN > > > > 3.4% > > > > > > > Thanks - that's interesting information.
-- Best regards, Andrew Zhang
