Re: Volano Report update
On Tue, 2003-06-03 at 04:17, Bill Huey wrote: > On Tue, Jun 03, 2003 at 11:49:28AM +0200, Marco Trevisan wrote: > > In my opinion: > > > > - you tested Blackdown-1.3.1 using green threads, but Sun JVM used > > native threads. In Linux this makes a huge difference in terms of thread > > scalability with one CPU. It should be useful to show the Linux Sun > > 1.3.1 JVM results with -green option. > > Also, 2.5.x Linux has changes to their 1:1 model that greatly increases > scalability for dealing with a large number of threads. Actually, those changes are already available in the standard kernel in RH9 (well, as long as you are on a Pentium Pro or better). --Chris -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Volano Report update
Ciao Marco, - you tested Blackdown-1.3.1 using green threads, but Sun JVM used native threads. In Linux this makes a huge difference in terms of thread scalability with one CPU. It should be useful to show the Linux Sun 1.3.1 JVM results with -green option. That's an easy test result to add. :) [EMAIL PROTECTED] john]$ /usr/java/jdk1.3.1_07/bin/java -green -version Green threads support not available Could not create the Java virtual machine. Even if it could run with green threads, Sun never fixed the following bug and therefore could never handle more than 1,018 concurrent connections with the Classic VM: Bug Id 4427986, "Classic VM goes into hard run at 1018 socket connections" http://developer.java.sun.com/developer/bugParade/bugs/4427986.html - It should be better to use Solaris 9 instead of Solaris 8, since the threading model has changed. I'm going to upgrade to Solaris 9 soon, but according to Sun's documention we should expect results similar to the "/usr/lib/lwp" rows in this table: Table 6: Performance comparison of Solaris threading options http://www.volano.com/report/index.html#sunthreads The alternative thread library (in /usr/lib/lwp) gives you the same one-to-one threading model on Solaris 8 that you get by default with Solaris 9. See the section called "Combinatorial review" here: Java and Solaris Threading http://java.sun.com/docs/hotspot/threads/threads.html Actually, we're going to make all the following upgrades soon: FreeBSD 4.6 -> FreeBSD 5.0 Red Hat Linux 8.0 -> Red Hat Enterprise Linux AS 2.1 Solaris 8 -> Solaris 9 Windows 2000 Advanced Server -> Windows Server 2003 Between 17 Java VMs and 4 operating systems, it's really hard to get the results published and have the very latest of everything. We also try to hold back a little bit on the upgrades so that we are still using what our customers might have. - It could be interesting to show the results using Sparc HW, in order to see how things change from Solaris 9-x86 to Solaris9-Sparc with the 64-bit JVM. I think I can compare 32-bit and 64-bit on the same machine if I go the AMD route, right? Intel is going to do something similar by emulating the 32-bit along with 64-bit, right? I prefer testing everything on identical hardware. I tested on Intel and SPARC for an old Java World magazine article, but it doesn't help much. Once you start changing the hardware, the results no longer tell you which *Java VM* is the best choice. We run the identical application on identical hardware so it's always an "apples to apples" comparison. The SPEC benchmarks are just hardware tests now because of the way they allow the results to be published. Try to pick the best Java virtual machine from this set of results, for example: Second Quarter 2003 SPEC JBB2000 Results http://www.spec.org/jbb2000/results/res2003q2/ And this doesn't help much either: Configurable Request http://www.spec.org/cgi-bin/osgresults?conf=jbb2000;op=form John Neffenger -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Volano Report update
Hi Bill, Also, 2.5.x Linux has changes to their 1:1 model that greatly increases scalability for dealing with a large number of threads. I was under the impression that Java application developers will have to wait for the Java virtual machines to take advantage of those threading changes before we see any benefits. I read that IBM needs to make changes in their Java VM on Linux to support it, for example. Is that correct? John Neffenger -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Volano Report update
On Tue, 2003-06-03 at 19:29, John Neffenger wrote: > Hi Bill, > > > Also, 2.5.x Linux has changes to their 1:1 model that greatly increases > > scalability for dealing with a large number of threads. > > I was under the impression that Java application developers will have to > wait for the Java virtual machines to take advantage of those threading > changes before we see any benefits. I read that IBM needs to make > changes in their Java VM on Linux to support it, for example. Is that > correct? That is my understanding right now. The latest JVM's from Sun and IBM apparently take steps to disable NPTL. I'm not if anyone working on the blackdown project is planning to get support for NPTL in ahead of Sun or IBM. --Chris -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: some tools in java....
About this eclipse does this have a drop down list of methods just like what other ide have? Does this have a help? I'm still browsing thru their web page but still didn't have the answers found. Maybe you guyz can answer that. = Kent E. -- this is a "corporate e-add" replying to [EMAIL PROTECTED] is different from replying to "Kent E. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> thanks. = -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 1:15 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: some tools in java > 1.) what IDE are you guys using in deploying java? You can use eclipse. It's open source and very good. I still prefer vim to an IDE. > 2.) are there any alternative in using VisualSourceSafe? Yes, you can use cvs. It's also open source and used tons of places. > 3.) what are the database available compatible in linux? Orcale will run on Linux, but it's expensive. MySQL works on Linux, but my favorite is PostgreSQL. It is far superior to MySQL. I use it on some production systems I run. http://www.postgresql.org. > 4.) etc. etc.. :-) You can also look at jboss and jonas if you want to do some J2EE development. They are open source as well. Erik Jensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Volano Report update
Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, 2003-06-03 at 19:29, John Neffenger wrote: >> Hi Bill, >> >> > Also, 2.5.x Linux has changes to their 1:1 model that greatly >> > increases scalability for dealing with a large number of threads. >> >> I was under the impression that Java application developers will >> have to wait for the Java virtual machines to take advantage of >> those threading changes before we see any benefits. I read that >> IBM needs to make changes in their Java VM on Linux to support it, >> for example. Is that correct? > > That is my understanding right now. The latest JVM's from Sun and > IBM apparently take steps to disable NPTL. Huh? RH 9 already uses NPTL, Sun and Blackdown JVMs work on it. (I don't know about IBM's.) > I'm not if anyone working on the blackdown project is planning to > get support for NPTL in ahead of Sun or IBM. It already works. (IBM's NGPT would have required some changes in JVMs but NGPT is dead.) Juergen -- Juergen Kreileder, Blackdown Java-Linux Team http://www.blackdown.org/java-linux/java2-status/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Volano Report update
John Neffenger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I think I can compare 32-bit and 64-bit on the same machine if I go > the AMD route, right? Yes (our AMD64 version will be ready for our 1.4.2 release) but, of course, you can't make assumptions about the performance differences between 32-bit and 64-bit JVMs on SPARC based on a comparison of 32-bit and 64-bit JVMs on AMD64. > Intel is going to do something similar by emulating the 32-bit along > with 64-bit, right? I prefer testing everything on identical > hardware. AFAIK the Itanium runs x86 code quite slowly. Juergen -- Juergen Kreileder, Blackdown Java-Linux Team http://www.blackdown.org/java-linux/java2-status/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Volano Report update
Christopher Smith wrote: On Tue, 2003-06-03 at 19:29, John Neffenger wrote: Hi Bill, Also, 2.5.x Linux has changes to their 1:1 model that greatly increases scalability for dealing with a large number of threads. I was under the impression that Java application developers will have to wait for the Java virtual machines to take advantage of those threading changes before we see any benefits. I read that IBM needs to make changes in their Java VM on Linux to support it, for example. Is that correct? That is my understanding right now. The latest JVM's from Sun and IBM apparently take steps to disable NPTL. I'm not if anyone working on the blackdown project is planning to get support for NPTL in ahead of Sun or IBM. No, that's not true. Both JDK 1.4.1 and 1.4.2 from Sun support NPTL. You can compare NPTL and LinuxThreads easily by running on RH-9 and setting LD_ASSUME_KERNEL to different values (see Redhat release notes). If you plan to run volano, don't forget to apply the latest glibc patch, it fixed a condvar bug that could hang volano. I've heard reports that 1.3.1 is OK too, but we didn't test it. Blackdown version works fine too. regards, -hui -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Volano Report update
Hi Juergen, I'm not if anyone working on the blackdown project is planning to get support for NPTL in ahead of Sun or IBM. It already works. Do you mean that the Sun and Blackdown native-thread HotSpot Server VMs will be able to go right up to 10,000 connections (about 20,000 threads) right out of the box on Red Hat Linux 9? (On Red Hat Linux 8.0, they both fail miserably just over 1,000 connections.) I've downloaded the Red Hat installation CD-ROMs, but I didn't think it was worth even trying it yet, figuring I had to wait for Java 1.5 or later for the vendors to support it. If Java and NPTL are working together already, that changes everything. Just when I thought I was done testing for a while ... John Neffenger -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Volano Report update
John Neffenger wrote: Hi Bill, Also, 2.5.x Linux has changes to their 1:1 model that greatly increases scalability for dealing with a large number of threads. I was under the impression that Java application developers will have to wait for the Java virtual machines to take advantage of those threading changes before we see any benefits. In 1.4.1 & 1.4.2, we didn't do any NPTL-specific optimization (read: no non-portable stuff that is based NPTL implemention). But the advantage of the new threading library is still easy to see. The easiest example is that you can create more than 1000 threads now, as NPTL no longer has the 1024 hard limit on max number of threads. We don't have any hard limit within JVM either. So running Sun JDK (or blackdown's) on NPTL will likely give you different results in section 3, network scalability. There are other improvements too. Some (e.g. faster mutex) may help Java applications, others (e.g. better signal handling) could be hardly noticeable unless you have JNI code. regards, -hui -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Volano Report update
From: Juergen Kreileder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > John Neffenger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I think I can compare 32-bit and 64-bit on the same machine if I go > > the AMD route, right? > > Yes (our AMD64 version will be ready for our 1.4.2 release) Do you mean Blackdown's 1.4.2 exploits 64-Bit Mode of AMD64? Was the adaptation made by Sun or Blackdown? I cannot find a version of J2SE exploiting the 64-Bit Modde on the J2SE download page in java.sun.com. Kazuyuki Shudo[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.shudo.net/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Volano Report update
Juergen Kreileder wrote: Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: On Tue, 2003-06-03 at 19:29, John Neffenger wrote: Hi Bill, Also, 2.5.x Linux has changes to their 1:1 model that greatly increases scalability for dealing with a large number of threads. I was under the impression that Java application developers will have to wait for the Java virtual machines to take advantage of those threading changes before we see any benefits. I read that IBM needs to make changes in their Java VM on Linux to support it, for example. Is that correct? That is my understanding right now. The latest JVM's from Sun and IBM apparently take steps to disable NPTL. Huh? RH 9 already uses NPTL, Sun and Blackdown JVMs work on it. (I don't know about IBM's.) To clarify: yes, RH9 has NPTL. However, NPTL changes the behavior of threading on Linux (actually makes it more POSIX compliant). These subtle changes in behavior tend to cause problems with complex software that is tightly tied to the underlying thread model. Certainly the existing Linux JVM's have had a LOT of tweaking done to them in order to deal with "differences" in Linux's thread model. This is also a problem for the WINE project (as another example). So, the simple thing to do is disable NPTL and use the old, less scalable thread model (basically you just set an environment variable and magically glibc uses LinuxThreads-style pthreads). It's my understanding that the Sun JVM does this, as does the WINE project. I am not certain about the IBM VM, but since they have not released a new VM since NPTL was released on a mainstream Linux platform (RH9), I suspect this is not the case. Someone who knows more, please let me know. I suspect that prior to NPTL being usable, changes will have to be made both the VM and the standard libraries. Perhaps with luck Sun/IBM/etc. can just use code from other POSIX platforms. I don't know. --Chris
Re: Volano Report update
On Tue, Jun 03, 2003 at 10:57:46PM -0700, John Neffenger wrote: > Hi Juergen, > Do you mean that the Sun and Blackdown native-thread HotSpot Server VMs > will be able to go right up to 10,000 connections (about 20,000 threads) > right out of the box on Red Hat Linux 9? (On Red Hat Linux 8.0, they > both fail miserably just over 1,000 connections.) I've downloaded the > Red Hat installation CD-ROMs, but I didn't think it was worth even > trying it yet, figuring I had to wait for Java 1.5 or later for the > vendors to support it. > > If Java and NPTL are working together already, that changes everything. > Just when I thought I was done testing for a while ... The kind of things in the next Linux kernel are pretty neat, but folks using LinuxThreads should also see a performance impact from the recent optimization concerning pid lookup in Linux. If I remember correctly, they use to do a lot of linear scanning, but now this is replaced by hashed/dictionary operations. Cond-var performance is a totally different issue, but the next version of Linux (2.6) should rock for thread creation/destruction and other things like that since 1:1 threading is more directly supported in the kernel instead of being a coarse hack. The next version of Linux is looking might nice. The current development version that I'm using runs very smoothly (2.5.70-mm1). There's enough that's going on with the next threading system (I forget the name, it's too confusing) that things like getting at the ucontext of a suspended thread and things like that can be directly support by the Linux kernel specifically for the Sun's JVM and other language runtimes. It's simple enough to do so since the framework for thread suspension can be added in easily, from what I see, and other things concerning garbage collection. All of that threading stuff is much more well structured now. Previously, you wouldn't entertain this possibity since LinuxThreads was so horrible. That's my take on it. :) bill -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Volano Report update
On Tue, 2003-06-03 at 23:30, Calvin Austin wrote: > I hope you guys are not confusing NGPT with NPTL :*) > > All JVMs can support NPTL with little or no change, NPTL is still an ongoing > project but you can see a difference already with Redhat 9 and Suns 1.4.2beta, > 1.4.1 will also work. I have an article waiting that has a benchmark showing > the difference I stand corrected. I had run benchmarks in the past which indicated that NPTL was not being used. I just reran the benchmarks, and I appear to be quite wrong. I also checked with lsof, and sure enough the JVM is linking with the NPTL libraries (unless you set LD_ASSUME_KERNEL to 2.4.1). I did some searching on bugtrack and found Bug ID #4802778, which indicates that the JVM has not been tuned for NPTL, but currently does use it, and that the LinuxThreads work arounds in the JVM proved to be benign. So, now I know what I'll be doing tomorrow: trying to figure out why the benchmarks indicated otherwise when I tested this a few months ago. :-( --Chris -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Volano Report update
> > Yes (our AMD64 version will be ready for our 1.4.2 release) > > Do you mean Blackdown's 1.4.2 exploits 64-Bit Mode of AMD64? > Was the adaptation made by Sun or Blackdown? > I cannot find a version of J2SE exploiting the 64-Bit Modde on the > J2SE download page in java.sun.com. Blackdown Offers Java Support for the Upcoming AMD Opteron and AMD Athlon Processors Based On Hammer Technology http://www.blackdown.org/java-linux/java2-status/pr/Blackdown-20021029.html I have just noticed this release now. I assume that the adapted J2SE exploits 64-bit mode. Kazuyuki Shudo[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.shudo.net/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
about eclipse
Im lost with their webpage… but are there 3 flavors of eclipse? Wat kind of eclipse are you guys using? Kent E.
Re: Volano Report update
Christopher Smith wrote: Juergen Kreileder wrote: Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: On Tue, 2003-06-03 at 19:29, John Neffenger wrote: Hi Bill, Also, 2.5.x Linux has changes to their 1:1 model that greatly increases scalability for dealing with a large number of threads. I was under the impression that Java application developers will have to wait for the Java virtual machines to take advantage of those threading changes before we see any benefits. I read that IBM needs to make changes in their Java VM on Linux to support it, for example. Is that correct? That is my understanding right now. The latest JVM's from Sun and IBM apparently take steps to disable NPTL. Huh? RH 9 already uses NPTL, Sun and Blackdown JVMs work on it. (I don't know about IBM's.) To clarify: yes, RH9 has NPTL. However, NPTL changes the behavior of threading on Linux (actually makes it more POSIX compliant). These subtle changes in behavior tend to cause problems with complex software that is tightly tied to the underlying thread model. Certainly the existing Linux JVM's have had a LOT of tweaking done to them in order to deal with "differences" in Linux's thread model. This is also a problem for the WINE project (as another example). So, the simple thing to do is disable NPTL and use the old, less scalable thread model (basically you just set an environment variable and magically glibc uses LinuxThreads-style pthreads). It's my understanding that the Sun JVM does this, as does the WINE project. I am not certain about the IBM VM, but since they have not released a new VM since NPTL was released on a mainstream Linux platform (RH9), I suspect this is not the case. Someone who knows more, please let me know. I suspect that prior to NPTL being usable, changes will have to be made both the VM and the standard libraries. Perhaps with luck Sun/IBM/etc. can just use code from other POSIX platforms. I don't know. That's not clarification. It's spreading wrong information. OK, I'm not a wine expert nor am I allowed to read IBM code. But I can speak for Sun JVM. No, there is no magic flag or whatever within JVM to disable NPTL. If you are running java on RH9 (or 2.5.xx kernel) with NPTL, you are indeed using the new pthread library. Still not convinced? Try creating more than 1024 threads, that's something you couldn't do without NPTL. There has been a lot of work done in the past to make this happen. Drop me an email if you'd like to hear more about the boring story of threading support within JVM ;-) thanks, -hui -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
