4 ms·
Presumably he is complaining about the GC implementation's characteristics, not its existence. You can read a description of the team's design decisions here: h
by asolove 10y ago
Presumably he is complaining about the GC implementation's characteristics, not its existence. You can read a description of the team's design decisions here: https://blog.golang.org/go15gc https://blog.golang.org/go15gc but a simple summary would be: memory is cheap and getting cheaper, so focus on making GC fast rather than small memory footprints.
- merb 10y agoactually thats what the Java G1GC (which will be the default in Java 9) does aswell. However I would still favor java instead of go
- stincity 10y agoHasn't go been improving the GC with it's rounds of updates to the language?
- kasey_junk 10y agoYes, with an emphasis on speed not memory.
- nameless912 10y agoAnd in my opinion, this is a great tradeoff. Ultimately, adding more RAM to a server (or clicking a button on the AWS console) is a very easy fix. However, reducing latency is almost never easy. If they can prevent GC stuttering, I'll take the higher memory overhead every time.
- tracker1 10y agoGC has gotten significantly better the last few releases, I don't think most applications will notice.