3 ms·
Wrong question. It doesn't consider associated drawbacks of the JVM strategy. Think multi-second pauses for full GC scans on real scenarios instead of artificia
by alecco 16y ago
Wrong question. It doesn't consider associated drawbacks of the JVM strategy. Think multi-second pauses for full GC scans on real scenarios instead of artificial benchmarks.
- axod 16y agoI assume you're talking about the GC defaults. It's not hard to switch it to doing incremental garbage collection, or one of the other numerous strategies available.
- alecco 16y agoIncremental GC is yet another JVM trade-off. It trashes the CPU cache all the time and with 100ns slowdown for each cache miss the gains I've seen on real life code are not even remotely close to what's advertised. And Java objects in real life tend to be big and not very local, from what I've seen.
- axod 16y agoWell, everything is a trade off. It depends what you're running. I use incgc with very good results compared to the defaults. The defaults usually result in pauses (Not good for something like mibbit), also defaults simply can't keep up with object churn. So, anecdotally, incgc works wonderfully.