uot;classic"
> openjdk.
>
> --
> Michele Sciabarra
> mich...@sciabarra.com
>
> - Original message -
> From: Jonathan P Springer
> To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Proposal for "fixing" the Java Runtime
> Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2019 2
ubject: Re: Proposal for "fixing" the Java Runtime
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2019 22:29:46 +
Could we also take a look at our choice of runtime? We moved to OpenJ9
rather than Hotspot because of the support for class caching, however
OpenJ9 is not available (yet) on the ARM64 architectu
Could we also take a look at our choice of runtime? We moved to OpenJ9
rather than Hotspot because of the support for class caching, however
OpenJ9 is not available (yet) on the ARM64 architecture. Since we’ve got a
benchmarking structure in place, can we compare and decide?
Sent from my
Michele Sciabarra wrote on 01/07/2019 04:53:25 PM:
>
> The slowdown in the init is because my PoC so far also compiles the
> source, I am sending a .java not a .jar. My plan is to implement
> also the precompilation as in Go.
>
Makes sense. Thanks.
--dave
Subject: Re: Proposal for "fixing" the Java Runtime
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2019 16:35:01 -0500
Michele Sciabarra wrote on 01/07/2019 01:08:25 PM:
>
> I benchmarked the java runtime, here:
>
> https://sciabarracom.github.io/incubator-openwhisk-runtime-actionloop/
>
>
Michele Sciabarra wrote on 01/07/2019 01:08:25 PM:
>
> I benchmarked the java runtime, here:
>
> https://sciabarracom.github.io/incubator-openwhisk-runtime-actionloop/
>
> As you can see the openwhisk/javaaction is pretty slow. Not sure
> why... So I did a proof of concept to see how much I can
Hello whiskers,
after thanking everyone for the honor of making me a committer, I do the
proposal I worked those days: "fixing" the Java runtime.
I benchmarked the java runtime, here:
https://sciabarracom.github.io/incubator-openwhisk-runtime-actionloop/
As you can see the
