harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Aleksey Shipilev" <aleksey.shipi...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [GSoC] Appliance for harmony-gc-4 "Unify the native memory management of Harmony DRLVM"
Date Wed, 02 Apr 2008 11:33:19 GMT
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 3:15 PM, Andrey Yakushev
<andrey.yakushev@gmail.com> wrote:
>  OK, let it would be the first step of investigation. But at least add
>  note that performance and memory footprint wouldn't be worse then now
>  on defined set of tests.
Right. But once again, without any prototype it's hard to guess the
performance changes.

Would these requirements fit?
 a. "The performance DRLVM with UMM enabled should be at least 80% of
DRLVM with legacy memory management, as measured by execution on
Dacapo, SPECjbb2005 and Eclipse startup".
 b. "The memory footprint of DRLVM with UMM enabled should be not
larger than 120% of DRLVM with legacy memory management, as measured
by execution on Dacapo, SPECjbb2005 and Eclipse startup".

Though these requirements are more or less loose, they protect from
UMM implementation that bloats up the performance or memory footprint
many times to be considered successful.

Thanks,
Aleksey.

Mime
View raw message