harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alexey Petrenko" <alexey.a.petre...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [general] Harmony performance page
Date Thu, 01 Feb 2007 18:26:57 GMT

is that right that we can publish IBM VME and JRockit VM versions for
Harmony with Harmony class library performance results on our
performance page?

SY, Alexey

2007/1/31, Tim Ellison <t.p.ellison@gmail.com>:
> Henrik Stahl wrote:
> >> If there are any design points in Harmony classlib or VM
> >> interface that you think would unduly affect JRockit
> >> achieving peak performance then we should talk about them too.
> >
> > Yes. Here's where it gets fun: Standard JRockit is based on class
> > libraries that we license from Sun. This is not the case with J9 if I
> > understand correctly.
> J9 is used with the Sun class libraries in IBM Java SDK 5.0, so it is a
> similar situation.
> > So if you run the JRockit JVM vs the JRockit eval VM for Harmony and
> > compare the performance, you will have a reasonable estimate on the
> > performance of the *class library*. Not entirely apples-to-apples, of
> > course, but it's a start.
> Yep.  Harmony has made some design choices, for example in the choice of
> VM kernel classes, that may affect performance with JRockit.  The kernel
> classes include those where the VM/JIT/GC has some intimate knowledge of
> their behaviour and shape, such as Class, Thread, and Reference.
> The intent is that VMs can augment that set as they see fit with any
> additional types that are 'kernel' for them, overriding the generic
> classlib version.
> Regards,
> Tim

View raw message