On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 at 09:15 -0700, Ross Werner wrote: > On Thu, 29 Jun 2006, Hans Fugal wrote: > >>>And I don't care what you say, Java IS a memory hog. I don't > >>>need some web article to debunk what I can see day in and day out on top > >>>and ps. > ... > >extra 11, and you still have 45m which ties for top RAM user with > >thunderbird, and they're both 20MB more than my biggest rails app. Now, > >I admit it looks like openoffice isn't running... > > I'd have to agree that Java is typically more memory-hungry than other > applications--however, in my experience that's only a one-time cost. In > other words, for me to run Eclipse comfortably I need half a gig of RAM > (a gig if I hope to run several other non-Java applications without > swapping). But I can run two or three more copies of Eclipse with very
Half a Gig!!! Even emacs can't approach that. > little overhead above that, as well as half a dozen other Java apps. The > intial memory cost to have something running in a JVM seems to be rather > high, but once you hit that point everything else seems to be very > comparable to non-Java applications in terms of memory usage. The same is true of gnome and qt/kde, the ruby interpreter, rails (if you're not using a frozen copy in vendor/), php, apache, etc. It's the beauty of shared memory. -- Hans Fugal ; http://hans.fugal.net There's nothing remarkable about it. All one has to do is hit the right keys at the right time and the instrument plays itself. -- Johann Sebastian Bach
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
/* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
