3 ms·
JNI is not considered to be a performant solution. Copying bytes across the jvm/c boundary is expensive. Depending on how the bindings are implemented (direct
by marktangotango 13y ago
JNI is not considered to be a performant solution. Copying bytes across the jvm/c boundary is expensive. Depending on how the bindings are implemented (direct vs undirect ByteBuffers for example) you could easily see drastic differences in performance at high through put.
- benmmurphy 13y agoThe interesting thing was the comparison looked like pure c++ vs java. GC can give you better throughput than a naive memory allocator if you are willing to deal with the unpredictable pauses.
- mey 13y agoBut for a Java developer looking to make use of ZeroMQ, that comparison wouldn't make sense as they already are taking on the burden of the JVM.