Costin Manolache wrote: > My benchmarks ( > 1 yr ago ) showed GCJ-based tomcat to be as fast > as the IBM JDK1.3 ( the fastest VM at that time ). There were small > differences under different loads - but the garbage collector seemed > like the biggest factor ( GCJ performed worse on JSP pages where > more objects were created if I remember correctly ).
Do you still have the benchmark code around? I'd love to see it... > The amazing thing was the startup time - almost 0 ( it felt more > like apache :-). It does start up fast :) The compiler we're using has a funky experimental optimiser (the same as used in the fast free eclipse project), and the startup became perhaps twice as fast when I switched from gcj 3.3. It compiles JSPs pretty fast too. That's one reason why I'd like to benchmark it. > BTW - GCJ is not a virtual machine and doesn't have a JIT - it is a > ahead-of-time compiler, just like C and C++ compilers. This may have been true a while back, but it isn't now -- gcj can interpret bytecode just like any other JVM. In my Tomcat package this is exactly what it does when executing servlets (everything else is built to native code). You're right in that doesn't have a JIT though. > The biggest problem at that time was dynamic class loading. GCJ has > a small interpretor and could load servlets - but the difference in > performance between precompiled code and interpretor was > significant. It probably still is, though not as bad. But it's not such a big problem as it seems, as most of the calls that a given servlet makes will be to native-compiled methods. Gary [ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ][ GnuPG 85A8F78B ][ http://inauspicious.org/ ] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
