4 ms·

It is getting added to Graal now. Disabled by default. OpenJDK has it for some architecture, I think Intel contributed it for x86 and there is this for aarch64.

It is getting added to Graal now. Disabled by default. OpenJDK has it for some architecture, I think Intel contributed it for x86 and there is this for aarch64. https://www.slideshare.net/mobile/linaroorg/auto-vectorization-support-in-openjdk9-hotspot-c2-compiler-bud1711 https://www.slideshare.net/mobile/linaroorg/auto-vectorizati... Update: This is about the FOSS edition not the EE one. See comment below.

pgrulich 7y ago
So for Graal we have the situation that Graal EE (Enterprise Edition) has auto-vectorization. However, its not in the open-source version as Oracle holds it back. The implementation in this issue is however provided by Twitter.
- StreamBright 7y ago
  Sorry I am not aware of EE and its features, I should have added that my comment was about the FOSS edition.
- pjmlp 7y ago
  One should also note that if it wasn't for Oracle, MaximeVM would have been yet another cool dead technology out of Sun Research Labs. So quite the opposite of holding it back.
  - amalter 7y ago
    I think Graal and Graal EE on Oracle Cloud is one of the smartest product moves out of Oracle in .... idk ... forever? However, it seems like a knifes edge to walk on. If Graal CE gets uptake, are there enough compiler folks at Redhat, Azul, Google, et. al. to shrink (or overtake) the Graal EE performance edge. Graal CE must be “good enough” to get people hooked that they then want to hold their nose enough to engage with Oracle (through Cloud or license). Maybe the management and visualization advantages are enough? I don’t think so though. I also don’t think it will pay off (despite the incredible technical achievement that Graal is). I was just talking with an ex-Oracle SMB sales rep, and they left because they would persuade businesses off SQL Server on technical merits, only to see their clients steamrolled by the Compliance Department a year later. Larry is, 75 years old or so? I think recent Microsoft history can show goodwill can be created quickly, but it must be done from the top down.
    - pjmlp 7y ago
      Commercial JDKs do pay off, so much that many of the commercial AOT compilers (since around 2000) are still in business, although with the ongoing support on OpenJDK that might change a bit (ExcelsiorJET just gave up). JIT and GC algorithms to the level done by JVM implementations don't come up with all nighters and weekend programming scratching an itch, and those software engineers need to be payed accordingly. So if others have a problem with Oracle, maybe they could compensate for the fact that Oracle employees still do 90% of Java development and OpenJDK related work.
      - amalter 7y ago
        The niche JDK vendors are an order of magnitude off what Oracle needs to fund JDK development. I suppose the closest example is Azul, which is using the same "pay for performance" model of Graal EE. I have absolutely nothing against some kind of commercial model for funding the JDK. My comments were that in my opinion, the model is unfortunately doomed: - Lack of goodwill for Oracle - Enterprises who are not yet Oracle customers really really want to stay away from entering into a commercial agreement. True or not, the perception is that a license agreement with Oracle comes with aggressive and intrusive compliance audits. - Worse is better syndrome - Indeed Oracle is the primary developer on the JDK, but the others entering this space are not hobbyists working on the side. Plenty of serious vendors with serious compiler chops have skin in keeping "free JRE" as the "fast enough" JRE. Redhat natch IBM, Google, Azul, Amazon, apparently Twitter (see pull request). Graal EE is supposedly 30-40% faster on some numeric workloads. But what if these players get that down to 20% or 10% .. or suddenly there might be workloads where CE is faster. Much harder to pitch that license agreement without compelling and unambiguous benefit. I don't have a "problem" with Oracle, I'm just commenting on where I think the industry is right now. Maybe Oracle will prove me wrong - Microsoft sure did.
        pjmlp 7y ago
        The others entering on this space are mostly repacking Oracle's work, in what concerns Java language and JVM specification. From those listed by you, IBM and Azul have their own JVM implementations, and just like Oracle require enterprise contracts for the cool features. Finally, everyone complains about Oracle, yet no one else bothered to make a counter offer to buy Sun.
  - pgrulich 7y ago
    True! I'm very happy about the general open-source culture in the graal project. They are in general very open for ideas and always support! That is very cool!

pgrulich 7y ago

So for Graal we have the situation that Graal EE (Enterprise Edition) has auto-vectorization. However, its not in the open-source version as Oracle holds it back. The implementation in this issue is however provided by Twitter.

StreamBright 7y ago
Sorry I am not aware of EE and its features, I should have added that my comment was about the FOSS edition.
pjmlp 7y ago
One should also note that if it wasn't for Oracle, MaximeVM would have been yet another cool dead technology out of Sun Research Labs. So quite the opposite of holding it back.
- amalter 7y ago
  I think Graal and Graal EE on Oracle Cloud is one of the smartest product moves out of Oracle in .... idk ... forever? However, it seems like a knifes edge to walk on. If Graal CE gets uptake, are there enough compiler folks at Redhat, Azul, Google, et. al. to shrink (or overtake) the Graal EE performance edge. Graal CE must be “good enough” to get people hooked that they then want to hold their nose enough to engage with Oracle (through Cloud or license). Maybe the management and visualization advantages are enough? I don’t think so though. I also don’t think it will pay off (despite the incredible technical achievement that Graal is). I was just talking with an ex-Oracle SMB sales rep, and they left because they would persuade businesses off SQL Server on technical merits, only to see their clients steamrolled by the Compliance Department a year later. Larry is, 75 years old or so? I think recent Microsoft history can show goodwill can be created quickly, but it must be done from the top down.
  - pjmlp 7y ago
    Commercial JDKs do pay off, so much that many of the commercial AOT compilers (since around 2000) are still in business, although with the ongoing support on OpenJDK that might change a bit (ExcelsiorJET just gave up). JIT and GC algorithms to the level done by JVM implementations don't come up with all nighters and weekend programming scratching an itch, and those software engineers need to be payed accordingly. So if others have a problem with Oracle, maybe they could compensate for the fact that Oracle employees still do 90% of Java development and OpenJDK related work.
    - amalter 7y ago
      The niche JDK vendors are an order of magnitude off what Oracle needs to fund JDK development. I suppose the closest example is Azul, which is using the same "pay for performance" model of Graal EE. I have absolutely nothing against some kind of commercial model for funding the JDK. My comments were that in my opinion, the model is unfortunately doomed: - Lack of goodwill for Oracle - Enterprises who are not yet Oracle customers really really want to stay away from entering into a commercial agreement. True or not, the perception is that a license agreement with Oracle comes with aggressive and intrusive compliance audits. - Worse is better syndrome - Indeed Oracle is the primary developer on the JDK, but the others entering this space are not hobbyists working on the side. Plenty of serious vendors with serious compiler chops have skin in keeping "free JRE" as the "fast enough" JRE. Redhat natch IBM, Google, Azul, Amazon, apparently Twitter (see pull request). Graal EE is supposedly 30-40% faster on some numeric workloads. But what if these players get that down to 20% or 10% .. or suddenly there might be workloads where CE is faster. Much harder to pitch that license agreement without compelling and unambiguous benefit. I don't have a "problem" with Oracle, I'm just commenting on where I think the industry is right now. Maybe Oracle will prove me wrong - Microsoft sure did.
      - pjmlp 7y ago
        The others entering on this space are mostly repacking Oracle's work, in what concerns Java language and JVM specification. From those listed by you, IBM and Azul have their own JVM implementations, and just like Oracle require enterprise contracts for the cool features. Finally, everyone complains about Oracle, yet no one else bothered to make a counter offer to buy Sun.
- pgrulich 7y ago
  True! I'm very happy about the general open-source culture in the graal project. They are in general very open for ideas and always support! That is very cool!