4 ms·
The JVM is fine for running low-latency automated trading systems. I wonder why it's not suitable for applications with timing requirements that are hundreds of
by anonymoushn 11y ago
The JVM is fine for running low-latency automated trading systems. I wonder why it's not suitable for applications with timing requirements that are hundreds of times more relaxed?
I don't know if the JVM is better or worse for this than some other runtime like Go's or the CLR or whatever, I just wrote about the JVM because it is the one that I have used in this context.
- humanrebar 11y ago> The JVM is fine for running low-latency automated trading systems. 1. There is a lot of expert tuning to get that sort of performance with respect to latency. That tuning would need to be reproduced for every target system. 2. Those trading systems can have ridiculous amounts of RAM to give the JVM GC lots of room to work with. 3. Reading packets from a wire and writing other packets to a wire is a different problem than reading controller inputs and modelling complex 3D worlds. ...that's not to say you can't have AAA Java games. To some degree that already happens with Android games, at least if you're willing to stretch the definition of AAA. (If you define AAA as "uses C++", the nomenclature becomes fairly moot).
- plonh 11y agoMinecraft is Java. It has awful performance (but it's simple enough and mixed desktops are powerful enough)