Re: Java 1.6
I think that was pure speculation. I use JDK 1.6 w/ Tomcat 5.5 in production and have had no issue. --David Marco wrote: Hello, I read in previous post today that someone wasn't sure whether Java 1.6 is compatible with tomcat 5.5. This is new to me. Does anyone know more about this (more specifically, what versions of tomcat DO work with SUN jvm 1.6)? Regards, Marco. - To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Java 1.6
David Smith wrote: I think that was pure speculation. I use JDK 1.6 w/ Tomcat 5.5 in production and have had no issue. Likewise, and they go very nicely indeed. p --David Marco wrote: Hello, I read in previous post today that someone wasn't sure whether Java 1.6 is compatible with tomcat 5.5. This is new to me. Does anyone know more about this (more specifically, what versions of tomcat DO work with SUN jvm 1.6)? Regards, Marco. - To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Java 1.6
Is there any performance increase that you've noticed? Pid wrote: David Smith wrote: I think that was pure speculation. I use JDK 1.6 w/ Tomcat 5.5 in production and have had no issue. Likewise, and they go very nicely indeed. p --David Marco wrote: Hello, I read in previous post today that someone wasn't sure whether Java 1.6 is compatible with tomcat 5.5. This is new to me. Does anyone know more about this (more specifically, what versions of tomcat DO work with SUN jvm 1.6)? Regards, Marco. - To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ - To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Java 1.6
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Daniel, Daniel M Garland wrote: Is there any performance increase that you've noticed? Relative to what? - -chris -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFG+oqd9CaO5/Lv0PARAhV2AJ9JKEIJq0q6mNM8oP7OViC3Ae/RegCgwART gV+9EbpMXyGlQN7jaP+bR2Q= =/xgh -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Java 1.6
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Pid, Pid wrote: I'm not sure if compiling Tomcat under 1.6 would produce even better performance - I don't know enough about byte code to comment on that, but some of the more enlightened listers may do. I don't believe that javac has undergone significant upgrades through the years... it's mostly things like syntactic sugar. The bytecode itself hasn't gotten too many updates over the years. In contrast, the interpreter and the JIT compilers have certainly been updated, optimized, debugged, etc. and so I would bet that each release of the JVM gets leaner and meaner. Of course, the JITs still operate on the same class files and bytecode so I would venture a guess that recompiling with the newer compiler would result in no measurable performance difference. - -chris -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFG+qyW9CaO5/Lv0PARAj03AKCBuEvTQbHn8czI+CLO7feMzhqFKgCgqGf6 IMJIxsdMnySWKe435kUB9+g= =zZlm -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Java 1.6
From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Java 1.6 I don't believe that javac has undergone significant upgrades through the years... Actually, it has, but the big improvements were between 1.3 and 1.5. The javac in Java SE 6 doesn't appear to be much different from that in 1.5 in terms of efficiency of the generated byte codes. I would bet that each release of the JVM gets leaner and meaner. Definitely meaner, in that the JITs do produce better code. I certainly wouldn't describe either of the HotSpot JITs as lean. (The server compiler was the basis for a several hundred-page PhD thesis a few years ago :-) - Chuck THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY MATERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail and its attachments from all computers. - To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Java 1.6
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Chuck, Caldarale, Charles R wrote: From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Java 1.6 I don't believe that javac has undergone significant upgrades through the years... Actually, it has, but the big improvements were between 1.3 and 1.5. Really? Other than crap like auto-boxing, attributes, and foreach-style 'for' syntax, what has the compiler done for me, lately? I see all that as syntactic sugar. The javac in Java SE 6 doesn't appear to be much different from that in 1.5 in terms of efficiency of the generated byte codes. Has the bytecode emitted by previous versions been perticularly non-optimized? I would bet that each release of the JVM gets leaner and meaner. Definitely meaner, in that the JITs do produce better code. I certainly wouldn't describe either of the HotSpot JITs as lean. (The server compiler was the basis for a several hundred-page PhD thesis a few years ago :-) I suppose by leaner, I meant in terms of required RAM. The libraries certainly aren't getting any lighter through the years ;) - -chris -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFG+q/C9CaO5/Lv0PARApNdAJ93Y8K7mqP/6bjdOXUkdPO4L8dZ9ACeKmcA gu9OUOsbIouVUMs6rBfKokU= =1nA9 -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Java 1.6
From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Java 1.6 Really? Other than crap like auto-boxing, attributes, and foreach-style 'for' syntax, what has the compiler done for me, lately? I see all that as syntactic sugar. Agreed, that is just syntax enhancement. I was referring to byte code generation, which has improved somewhat over the years. (I don't have any numbers, though.) Has the bytecode emitted by previous versions been perticularly non-optimized? Loops have gotten better, and there's less wasted byte codes (e.g., computations whose results aren't stored anywhere now usually don't generate any code rather than just being discarded at the end with a pop of the operand stack). The JITs usually took care of this anyhow, but the first few thousand trips through a given method via the interpreter would suffer. I suppose by leaner, I meant in terms of required RAM. Not sure about that. A lot of the JIT-related performance improvement is due to increased inlining and loop unrolling; those techniques consume more memory per method, not less. - Chuck THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY MATERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail and its attachments from all computers. - To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Java 1.6
Christopher Schultz wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Chuck, Caldarale, Charles R wrote: From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Java 1.6 I don't believe that javac has undergone significant upgrades through the years... Actually, it has, but the big improvements were between 1.3 and 1.5. Really? Other than crap like auto-boxing, attributes, and foreach-style 'for' syntax, what has the compiler done for me, lately? I see all that as syntactic sugar. IME, there was a big jump in application performance from 1.3 to 1.4, and a smaller one from 1.4 to 1.5. That may well have been due to the improvements in the JIT compiler, though. The addition of generics in 1.5 was an important improvement in making reliable code the first time around, too. There were also significant enhancements in the language to make certain operations a lot easier from 1.3 to 1.4, and again a smaller jump from 1.4 to 1.5. I can't come up with any specific examples right now, but I certainly remember thinking how nice it was when I upgraded my app and was able to replace large chunks of hand-written code with one or a few lines of new method calls. D - To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
