Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-harmony-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 9606 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2007 09:44:31 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 10 Dec 2007 09:44:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 80536 invoked by uid 500); 10 Dec 2007 09:44:18 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-harmony-dev-archive@harmony.apache.org Received: (qmail 80512 invoked by uid 500); 10 Dec 2007 09:44:18 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@harmony.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@harmony.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@harmony.apache.org Received: (qmail 80503 invoked by uid 99); 10 Dec 2007 09:44:18 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 10 Dec 2007 01:44:18 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of xiaofeng.li@gmail.com designates 64.233.166.177 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.233.166.177] (HELO py-out-1112.google.com) (64.233.166.177) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 10 Dec 2007 09:43:57 +0000 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id u77so3627551pyb for ; Mon, 10 Dec 2007 01:43:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=b4xafuG9s98N01b60Cyvb4yXynkT8quPyM+wQNpeJaM=; b=MTmx62a0ypLTmcwGab5pvPh/955BKxRpgPGjPmt8RdfwmOM+zeWDeaGm/Ei52RBJi6KNu8BT3YdXIqmf6xEPee+0lm5gNEN8cwCfZYET0a9FecRAEmIySbs01X+NYvCH+yykaTQHluPnvTRD5ouWUzQs2/h9tAf+DTOU/3GCzMM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=xHQ+p8t3B3SFZvvcN/q0mPxUxdiKzGwROVzx71G3FwImd3OBumMwRZAN+BXEHkHyUa7lBBkDtJGLVo2X0jJ94wPv0zLRWiEpr7cG6SLBzvSXThfmy6tWeW1EDWY734r4PLhzGsPEWWk45aFydNZB9eA/omqYbsdFW9hZoGj38qE= Received: by 10.142.246.8 with SMTP id t8mr140673wfh.1197279838773; Mon, 10 Dec 2007 01:43:58 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.79.20 with HTTP; Mon, 10 Dec 2007 01:43:58 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <9623c9a50712100143h44d729d2xba6ee175d593aae0@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:43:58 +0800 From: "Xiao-Feng Li" To: dev@harmony.apache.org Subject: Re: [drlvm][general] Multi-tasking VM? In-Reply-To: <3db9f87f0712100102w620b906bv4d44421bb2ee218c@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <3db9f87f0712092100q3bb3a4a7k61d6828a4849435c@mail.gmail.com> <9623c9a50712092211s372a2629g52c0492767126454@mail.gmail.com> <3db9f87f0712092249n9783f51j891a4c1f18f47f65@mail.gmail.com> <9623c9a50712092324x6393b2d3s1fba3874133ff19a@mail.gmail.com> <3db9f87f0712100102w620b906bv4d44421bb2ee218c@mail.gmail.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Dec 10, 2007 5:02 PM, Simon Chow wrote: > Yes, I agree that. > > But I think MVM's feature of sharing class runtime representations across > applications' can make many apps benefit not only at startup phases, but > also at runtime. Yes. Runtime sharing could be useful. Without MVM, this can be made available through OS supports to dynamic shared objects (with careful design). > Besides these, I guess processes scheduling may be useful when running 2 > related programs like server and database. > And migration Java processes between defferent JVMs would be useful for load > balance and reliability in distributed enviroment. I remember MVM was only for shared memory system, no support to distributed environment (unless you meant distributed shared memory system, but that's too far a concept). Btw, please use the word "process" carefully, because the tasks in MVM are not the processes in traditional sense. My understanding of "process" is clearly the entity with address space isolation. > Ok, it may be useless idea in practice. But if all these things can be > achived just by MVM. Is it valuable to do it? The problem is, whether we want to achieve those benefits with MVM if they can attained through other approaches. In my opinion, the key concept of MVM is to share the same virtual address space between multiple JVM instances. But since the address space isolation with process has been well established, proven, and mature in current platforms, then how to share the space needs deep thinking and serious proving. Simon, it's good for you to think of these things. It's always encouraged. And my comments are only my personal opinions, just for your reference. Thanks, xiaofeng > Thanks for your comments! > > > On 10/12/2007, Xiao-Feng Li < xiaofeng.li@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Dec 10, 2007 2:49 PM, Simon Chow wrote: > > > Acturally, I am just a greenhand for JVM. > > > After seeing some paper about MVM, which says MVM can reduce the startup > > > > > overhead and footprint of programs, I think both destop application and > > > server application can benefit from it. > > > In my opinion, at least, some IDE can use it for debugging small program > > > more conveniently by avoiding startup overhead. > > > > > > Could you say something about its shortage? > > > Thank you! > > > > Simon, I think the advantage (shorter startup time) of MVM you > > mentioned can be achieved without MVM. Don't you think so? > > > > Thanks, > > xiaofeng > > > > > > On 10/12/2007, Xiao-Feng Li wrote: > > > > > > > > On Dec 10, 2007 1:00 PM, Simon Chow < simon.harmony@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Will harmony support the multi-tasking feature? > > > > > I has seen that Sun has a project name > > > > > Barcelona< http://research.sun.com/projects/barcelona>which aimed to > > > > > run several Java applications on 1 JVM. > > > > > Maybe it can improve the JVM performance somehow. > > > > > I am very interested about this, but I can not find more resource > > about > > > > > this.... > > > > > > > > In foreseeable future, Harmony might have no plan for MVM support. I > > > > had some investigations in this area, and I personally am not fully > > > > convinced by the idea. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > xiaofeng > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > From : Simon.Chow@Software School of Fudan University > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > http://xiao-feng.blogspot.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > From : Simon.Chow@Software School of Fudan University > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > http://xiao-feng.blogspot.com > > > > > > -- > > From : Simon.Chow@Software School of Fudan University > -- http://xiao-feng.blogspot.com