3 ms·

The notion that the JVM is not heavy because it needs less than a GB of disk space seems crazy to me. I consider OpenSSL to be wildly bloated because it is ove

The notion that the JVM is not heavy because it needs less than a GB of disk space seems crazy to me. I consider OpenSSL to be wildly bloated because it is over 1 MB.

sp332 10y ago
OpenSSL only does one thing.
- 0xfeba 10y ago
  Well, LibreSSL devs considered OpenSSL bloated from a security standpoint [1]. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LibreSSL#Code_removal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LibreSSL#Code_removal
gozur88 10y ago
A megabyte of disk space is now worth about $0.0000290, according to this site: http://www.jcmit.com/diskprice.htm http://www.jcmit.com/diskprice.htm The numbers we're talking about here just aren't a practical consideration any more.
- cperciva 10y ago
  The disk space is cheap, sure. But the CPU time spent by the dynamic linker resolving thousands upon thousands of symbols? That's actually rather painful.
  - gozur88 10y ago
    You must be very busy if two hundred milliseconds is painful.
zigzigzag 10y ago
The actual HotSpot JVM itself is about 10mb, but that includes 4 GCs and 2 JIT compilers. The Avian JVM can statically link an entire program and widget toolkit with itself and produce a 1mb binary. It's not that big a deal. The space gets taken up by all the libraries. But then you'd want to compare a JVM against e.g. /usr/lib on a fresh Linux install ...
deepsun 10y ago
OpenSSL relies on system libraries (timezones, locales etc.) that is built-in to JVM, so it's not apple-apple comparison.