kirk wrote: >> I've actually never seen this outpacing on a Sun JVM. >> >> On an IBM JVM, though, that's another story. >> > IBM's heap structure is fragile but fast when it works > That can be said for IBM's JVM period -- it is /very /fragile. It is /arguably/ fast when it works (I'm not sure what the latest benchmarks say, but one can likely find one to say most anything....)
Personally I see this as a non-starter. A JVM's job #1 is to work -- period. Only when that is accomplished can one move on to job #2, performance -- at which point one still must not undo/break job #1. Sure there are extreme circumstances under which most any JVM will break, but IBM's JVM seems prone to break in countless situations where Sun's just plain works. Given this I really could care less whether or not IBM's JVM is fast -- it does not work reliably in the first place. -- Jess Holle --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to javaposse@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
