On Sun, 4 Jul 1999, Albrecht Kleine wrote:
> > I forgot to mention that the machines are running the x86 JIT. Our next
> > step is to find a way to run the Solaris versions of JDK1.2 and see what
> > those numbers look like.
>
> TYA jit 1.4 on a plain P200 jdk1.2
> takes 100 sec for myprog_stat
> I forgot to mention that the machines are running the x86 JIT. Our next
> step is to find a way to run the Solaris versions of JDK1.2 and see what
> those numbers look like.
TYA jit 1.4 on a plain P200 jdk1.2
takes 100 sec for myprog_static
and 110 sec for myprog.
(But invocation is the m
On Sat, 3 Jul 1999, Nick Lawson wrote:
> My first guess would be that the jit is better at static calls than virtual.
> Nick
>
> > There are strange timings for the following programs. In particular, the
> > static version runs at about half the speed of the nonstatic version,
> > which seems b
My first guess would be that the jit is better at static calls than virtual.
Nick
Patrick LAM wrote:
> We have some machines running Debian 2.1 here (libc 5.4.46), and we are
> running the pre-v2 Linux port of Java.
>
> There are strange timings for the following programs. In particular, the
>
I forgot to mention that the machines are running the x86 JIT. Our next
step is to find a way to run the Solaris versions of JDK1.2 and see what
those numbers look like.
pat
On Fri, 2 Jul 1999, Patrick LAM wrote:
> We have some machines running Debian 2.1 here (libc 5.4.46), and we are
> runni
We have some machines running Debian 2.1 here (libc 5.4.46), and we are
running the pre-v2 Linux port of Java.
There are strange timings for the following programs. In particular, the
static version runs at about half the speed of the nonstatic version,
which seems backwards; static takes 232s a
