4 ms·
This is surprising. Last I checked performance was better than node. Are you taking into account JVM warmup time ? Also does the JVM have adequate memory (thin
by lf-non 5y ago
This is surprising. Last I checked performance was better than node.
Are you taking into account JVM warmup time ? Also does the JVM have adequate memory (thinking of GC thrashing)?
- vips7L 5y agoThe readme of TruffleRuby even states that large ruby applications take a large time to warmup and they're working on it.
- an_opabinia 5y ago> Last I checked performance was better than node. I don't know if there's any real world node application that is faster on GraalJS, no matter how much "warming up." It is incredibly slow. I understand there's marketing copy out there saying stuff to the contrary, but really, if it was that great, people would be using it. Which I'm confident people don't, because real world applications use tons of the node API that Graal doesn't support, like `setTimeout`.
- kaba0 5y agoLooking at the issues of GraalJS, it seems to me rather that it is a few nodejs devs who doesn’t seem to know what is a worthwhile benchmark, sometimes laughably so. It is well within the same performance range, faster at some tasks, slower at others.