On Sun, Feb 23, 2003 at 11:40:51AM -0800, Ian Clarke wrote:
> > AutoRequester), run in a separate VM if we run the client code separate
> > from the node, and with its own port. It might be a superset of low
> 
> I am not sure I will ever understand those that argue that we should
> run different things in different VMs.  Requiring more than one
> concurrent JVM will only serve to further burden our user's computers. 

If you don't want to hear incohernt ranting, delete this mail now ;).

On sun's java 1.4, or a java 1.1 vm in classic mode, this is an entirely
true statement.  However, on some other JVM's, life is not quite this
simple.  

That said, I don't advocate running multiple JVMs.  But the argument is,
nonetheless, unfortunantly valid.

Many JVM's deal very poorly with threads.  This is ironic, considering
that threading is one of the staples of java.  Additionally, some
JVM's just pass threading over to the OS.  This is fine if your OS
is Win32 or Solaris, but some OSs (read: linux) have really quite
shitty threading code, as well as some quite artificial limits
on threads per process.

(sun 1.4, btw, works around this problem by implenting hybrid
native/green threads.  It works surprisingly well.)

The major argument for multiple JVM's, is that often it will allow
you to run twice the amount of low load threads (read: network
connections, fproxy) while having them isolated from being killed
in favour of, say, FNP or FEC threads, or indeed vice versa. There
is a ram hit, but most of the useless infrastucture gets swapped
out anyhow, so it doesn't take up too many more resources.

Yes, it does suck.  Ideally, we'd have a free sun v1.4 quality 
JVM, or at least sun v1.4 would build fred (btw, if anyone knows how
to make it do this, can you please tell me?  java 1.3 really
hates my system).

No, I'm not going to write one ;).

        - fish

(For the record, I run Blackdown v1.3 in classic mode on the
box that I do freenet related hacking on, because I can't build with 
v1.4, and in native mode i have threading issues)

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to