JVM News

JVM News

[achrist]

Here is some info about the JVM from Sun that may give a clue why JGnat
never became a successful product for ACT:

http://www.internalmemos.com/memos/memodetails.php?memo_id=1321


Al

Re: JVM News

[Craig Carey]

On Fri, 07 Feb 2003 14:57:01 -0800, achrist@easystreet.com wrote:

>Here is some info about the JVM from Sun that may give a clue why JGnat
>never became a successful product for ACT:
>
>http://www.internalmemos.com/memos/memodetails.php?memo_id=1321
>
>

It seems like Sun has decided that Java won't be debugged which would
cause irreparable damage to the sellability of that product item.

A summary of the memo follows. It is about the JVM in the Solaris OS.


Subject:  Sun says 22% of JVM bugs left unfixed (apparently)

>
>A website hosting some internal memorandums, & a [leaked] Sun memo:
>
>http://www.internalmemos.com/memos/memodetails.php?memo_id=1321
>
(The date of the leaked Sun memo seems to be 2001 or 2002.)
...
>
>| Sun Microsystems
>|
>| The Java Problem
>| Author: Julian S. Taylor
>| Reviewed by: Steve Talley, Mark Carlson, Henry Knapp,
>|    Willy (Waikwan) Hui, Eugene Krivopaltsev, Peter
>|    Madany, Michael Boucher
>|
>...
>| This document ... represents a consensus of several
>| senior engineers within Sun Microsystems. ... Our
>| experience in filing bugs against Java has been to see
>| them rapidly closed as "will not fix". 22% of accepted
>| non-duplicate bugs against base Java are closed in this
>| way as opposed to 7% for C++. Key examples include:
>|
>| 4246106 Large virtual memory consumption of JVM
>| 4374713 Anonymous inner classes have incompatible
>|         serialization
>| 4380663 Multiple bottlenecks in the JVM
>| 4407856 RMI secure transport provider doesn't timeout
>|         SSL sessions
>| 4460368 For jdk1.4, JTable.setCellSelectionEnabled()
>|         does not work
>| 4460382 For Jdk1.4, the table editors for JTable do not
>|         work.
>| 4433962 JDK1.3 HotSpot JVM crashes Sun Management
>|         Center Console
>| 4463644 Calculation of JTable's height is different for
>|         jdk1.2 and jdk1.4
>| 4475676 [under jdk1.3.1, new JFrame launch causes
>|         jumping]
>|
>| In personal conversations with Java engineers and
>| managers, it appears that Solaris is not a priority and
>| the resource issues are not viewed as serious. Attempts
>| to discuss this have not been productive and the
>| message we hear routinely from Java engineering is that
>| new features are key and improvements to the foundation
>| are secondary. ...
>...
>| dependencies for deployment". Following is an excerpt:
>|
>| - Large footprint of applications when run on Solaris.
>|   A simple application ("hello world" type) has a total
>|   footprint of 35-40 megs on Solaris 9 (build 48, using
>|   Java 1.4 build 82) on both Intel and Sparc machines.
>|   Sparc machines, by far, have a much higher resident
>|   footprint then Intel machines (~30 megs, compared to
>|   ~11 megs). The same program run on a Windows machine
>|   has a footprint of ~5 megs, resident footprint being
>|   ~3.5 megs.
>...
>| SMC, Sun's flagship system admin console, takes between
>| one and two minutes to reach the point that it can be
>| used. ...
>|
>| Given this data, it appears that the JRE can actually
>| be simpler than the Python RE since Java does at least
>| some of this work at compile time. ... Hello World
>| written in Java2 requires 9M for this most basic
>| support infrastructure. ... Further examples of what is
>| possible include the compiling OO languages Eiffel and
>| Sather which fit their garbage collector, exception
>| processor and other infrastructure into roughly 400K of
>| resident set.
>|
>| ... It is impractical to run it as a non-terminating
>| daemon. ... Java applications cannot be executed at
>| boot time since the loading of the VM introduces an
>| unacceptable performance degradation. ...
>...
>| We strongly recommend that management require Java to
>| conform to the Software Development Framework
>| especially from the standpoint of ARCreview
>| [Architecture Review Committees]
>...
>| What is perhaps more important is that the perception
>| of Java as an unstable platform is widespread. This
>| perception is restated with every Java-based project to
>| come to ARC. Within Sun, Java is not viewed as a
>| satisfactory language for the construction of
>| commercial applications.
>
...

>Java is compared with Ada 95 here:
>   http://www.gnat.com/texts/products/prod_java.htm
>
>Sun does not seem to have the word Ada in its corporate
>vocabulary. They got the word "Eiffel" into their memo though,
>a near miss.
...


A similar problem is occurring at the Gcc project as it gets slower.
There was talk of forking the project. Mr Dewar said that Gcc could be
faster.

__________________________________________________________________________
At 03\02\12 09:15 -0800 Wednesday, Linus Torvalds wrote to gcc-at-gnu.org
...
>That said, at least some comparisons with the Intel compiler on an older 
>kernel imply that the Intel compiler improves things like UDP and TCP 
>latency by 10-25% on 2.4.18 (in fact, the UDP path was apparently 
>magically improved by up to 30%, which is damn impressive):
>
>	http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=103559880923586&w=2
>
>So compiler code generation quality still _does_ matter. It's not as if 
>the [gcc] code is unoptimizable.
>
>So: 50% slower compiles from 2.95 to 3.2. With no noticeable improvement.
>
>			Linus
__________________________________________________________________________


Actually the Gcc project was forked in about August 2002:
__________________________________________________________________________

At 03\02\11 23:32 +0000 Tuesday, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
...
>We *have* the faster-compiler-branch, created at the same time as
>gcc-3_4-basic-improvements-branch
><http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2002-08/msg01575.html>.  It just hasn't been
>used, whereas BIB was extensively used.
__________________________________________________________________________




Craig Carey
http://www.ijs.co.nz/ada_95.htm : Mailing lists

Re: JVM News

[Marin David Condic]

35-40 meg for a "Hello World" app? That seems to be a number so extreme as
to be highly questionable. Are they talking about the size of the Java Byte
Code or are they talking about the the total size of the entire Java
environment necessary to run a "Hello World" app? The former is really hard
to believe and the latter might be a bit of an unfair criticism. (Would a
"Hello World" app written for Windows have to count all of Windows as part
of its "footprint"?)

MDC
--
======================================================================
Marin David Condic
I work for: http://www.belcan.com/
My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/

Send Replies To: m c o n d i c @ a c m . o r g

    "Going cold turkey isn't as delicious as it sounds."
        -- H. Simpson
======================================================================

Craig Carey <research@ijs.co.nz> wrote in message
news:45fn4v02qogsiv58aj7rhsog2pkudvae59@4ax.com...
> >|
> >| - Large footprint of applications when run on Solaris.
> >|   A simple application ("hello world" type) has a total
> >|   footprint of 35-40 megs on Solaris 9 (build 48, using
> >|   Java 1.4 build 82) on both Intel and Sparc machines.
> >|   Sparc machines, by far, have a much higher resident
> >|   footprint then Intel machines (~30 megs, compared to
> >|   ~11 megs). The same program run on a Windows machine
> >|   has a footprint of ~5 megs, resident footprint being
> >|   ~3.5 megs.

Re: JVM News

[Jano]

En el mensaje <b2ir4p$a4$1@slb3.atl.mindspring.net>, 
mcondic.auntie.spam@acm.org dice...
> 35-40 meg for a "Hello World" app? That seems to be a number so extreme as
> to be highly questionable. Are they talking about the size of the Java Byte
> Code or are they talking about the the total size of the entire Java
> environment necessary to run a "Hello World" app? The former is really hard
> to believe and the latter might be a bit of an unfair criticism. (Would a
> "Hello World" app written for Windows have to count all of Windows as part
> of its "footprint"?)

I understand the latter. But they also say that's not totally unfair 
because if you are in a shared machine -for example at my school, isn't 
inusual that 30 or 40 students make a practice over the same machine via 
xterms- then every java apprentice trying his "hello world" will require 
40 megs. And if the program is not a trivial one the footprint quickly 
grows.

Yes, one can better share the JVM, but if you want different 
applications to be completely isolated to prevent one bringing down 
another...

Re: JVM News

[Florian Weimer]

"Marin David Condic" <mcondic.auntie.spam@acm.org> writes:

> 35-40 meg for a "Hello World" app?

The address space for Hello World on Solaris 9/SPARC is 43 MiB.  Of
that, slightly more than 8 MiB are actually memory-resident.  (This is
the HotSpot Client VM, build 1.4.1_01-b01.)

Execution time is 0.34 seconds on a reasonably current machine.  You
can squeeze this to 0.27 seconds if you use a previous version of the
JVM (1.4.0), but this one requires 11 MiB of residental memory.

Re: JVM News

[Richard Riehle]

Craig Carey wrote:

> On Fri, 07 Feb 2003 14:57:01 -0800, achrist@easystreet.com wrote:
>
> >Here is some info about the JVM from Sun that may give a clue why JGnat
> >never became a successful product for ACT:
> >
> >http://www.internalmemos.com/memos/memodetails.php?memo_id=1321
> >

Sad thing about the World Wide Web.  Anything that appears in print is taken
as
factual.   Has anyone taken the trouble to confirm that this memo is
authentic?

Richard Riehle

Re: JVM News

[Samuel Tardieu]

>>>>> "Richard" == Richard Riehle <richard@adaworks.com> writes:

Richard> Sad thing about the World Wide Web.  Anything that appears in
Richard> print is taken as factual.  Has anyone taken the trouble to
Richard> confirm that this memo is authentic?

This is not specific to the world wide web. People also believe what
they read in the newspaper and what they are told on TV...

  Sam
-- 
Samuel Tardieu -- sam@rfc1149.net -- http://www.rfc1149.net/sam

Re: JVM News

[Alexandre E. Kopilovitch]

Richard Riehle <richard@adaworks.com> wrote:
> >http://www.internalmemos.com/memos/memodetails.php?memo_id=1321
>
>Sad thing about the World Wide Web.  Anything that appears in print is taken as
>factual.   Has anyone taken the trouble to confirm that this memo is authentic?

Incidentally I am able to confirm authenticity of that memo... to some degree,
of course - I can't confirm every word in it, but generally the text is genuine.


Alexander Kopilovitch                      aek@vib.usr.pu.ru