Is symcjit, the Symantec JIT running on WinNT? I'd greatly appreciate
finding out more, but to my knowledge the available JITs are TYA and
shuJIT for the port of Sun's VM and the JIT within Kaffe.
shuJIT doesn't appear to be mentioned very often in performance
comparisons in this list. Its website boasts performance results that are
usually better than TYA 1.2v3, and I'd be curious to hear about it's ease
of use. (http://www.shudo.net/jit/)
David Craig
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED], the rest: http://www.csrd.uiuc.edu/~dcraig
On Wed, 17 Feb 1999, Artur Biesiadowski wrote:
> "Joseph H. Buehler" wrote:
>
> > That's about 14 microseconds per loop, which is very slow, given what
> > the code is doing on each pass through the loop: setting a bit in a
> > bit array.
> >
> > Preallocating the BitSet doesn't change things. I installed tya using
> > egcs, and tried various optimization flags, and some minor variations
> > in tyaconfig.h, but the timing does not vary a whole lot.
> >
> > Do these results seem reasonable?
>
> You have not given results for jdk without tya. I've done few tests, and
> tya gives me 2.5x speedup on this test. For comparison symcjit is about
> 16x faster. After some divisions I came up with following numbers (all
> are quite rounded)
>
> 5000 cycles per iteration for plain jdk
> 1900 cycles per iteration for tya
> 300 cycles per iteration for symcjit
>
> I think that that are quite reasonable number if you think about all
> things that have to be done. For set method there are about 4 method
> calls that need to be done + one synchronization. Additional problem is
> that BitSet uses longs internally which causes a major slowdown on
> intel.
>
> Try to rewrite your benchmark using explicit array of ints, preallocated
> to correct size, and then just fill it bit after bit. This way you will
> get bare speed of java, without BitSet overhead. BitSet was not designed
> to perform as buffer for image manipulation.
>
> Artur
>
