On Sat, 23 Feb 2013 23:22:54 +0400 Dmitry Olshansky <[email protected]> wrote: > > A trivial example is storage of pairs or tuples. That plus using > Java's containers makes memory footprint explode. At 100K+ hash-map I > notice quite high factor of waste. It's some double digits compared > to plain C arrays. I probably shouldn't care that much since servers > are having tons of 0RAM these days
That "tons of RAM" isn't always true. My server is a lower-end VPS, so I have a mere 512 MB RAM: one-eighth as much as my *budget-range laptop*. But it's been fine for me so far, especially since I don't run JVM on it. (I know I could use a dedicated physical server and easily get far more RAM, but I *love* VPS hosting - all the many benefits of an external web host (ex: not having to pay for my own T1 or better), but without the near-total lack of control or the impossibility of finding a company that knows what they're doing.) Anyway, I'd love more RAM and I will certainly get it when I need to, but every double-ing of my server's RAM will double my hosting costs - and doing that just for the sake of downgrading from a great language like D to a mediocre one like Java (even if it's J8+) wouldn't make very good business sense ;) Higher costs *plus* lower productivity and morale...yea, not exactly a great deal ;) My main point, of course, being: "Tons of RAM" isn't *always* the case for servers. Thank goodness for D :)
