On Thu, May 27, 2004 at 09:15:25AM +0200, Garb wrote:
> >Conrad Sabatier wrote:
> > I find Java's memory requirements to be totally
> > unreasonable, its performance lackluster, and I've
> > finally come to the conclusion that it was indeed a
> > poor choice of language in which to implement a project
> > of this size and complexity.
> As far as I see it, freenet is very much a project under development at the
> time, so therefore overall functionality and ease of coding should naturally
> take precedence over tweaking and local optimization on specific platforms.
> Conrad Sabatiers point is certainly valid enough. A little while back I took
> my linux box down for a 256MB memory update. When I started it back up, I
> was genuinely surprised over the substantial gain in speed and
> responsiveness I got from a measely 256MB upgrade - until I realized that I
> hadnt started freenet yet. When I did, performance went down the drain right
> away.

Freenet's memory usage has already been improved substantially over
where it was 6 or 12 months ago. However, as I have said over and over,
and especially in the light of Moore's Law (which will likely continue
for at least the next five years):
RAM is cheap. Working software is expensive (the currency is man years).
Freedom is *REALLY* expensive (the currency is human blood).
> I would imagine that freenet will eventually reach a point in its
> development cycle where both the networking protocol and the API are pretty
> fixed and no longer likely to undergo major changes. And at this time, the
> focus of the project should be switched to reduction of the system footprint
> and increasing the efficiency of execution on different platforms.

Perhaps, perhaps not. I expect Freenet to continue to innovate the core
platform for many years to come.
> I also imagine that freenet, once mature, will be a natural part of most
> major linux distros as one of the essentail networks that is supported out
> of the box - but that will not be in the form of a java app.

Perhaps. And I don't see what Java has to do with it. Currently Freenet
only works on the Sun JVM. In the future it will work with Kaffe, GCJ
and all the Classpath-based free JVMs. GCJ will mean that it can be
shipped as a standalone binary.
> Java is a great prototyping tool for the developers and programmers, but it
> is also the cause of many problems for the users. In fact I would estimate
> that 90% of the times that I have been called upon to assist someone in
> getting freenet to run, the difficulties have been caused by java rather
> than freenet itself.

That has NOT been my experience.
> And it IS bloated and it DOES take up a lot of ressources - a fact that I
> see mentioned often in the mailing lists. I can imagine that this is also
> frustrating for the developers to read, since they cant do much about it -
> this is mainly in the hands of Sun Micro Systems... 

Java is a source of memory bloat. So is Freenet's architecture and bugs.
We try to fix actual leaks. Sometimes we try to improve overall
memory/CPU usage for its own sake. But see above. We are not writing a
word processor here. We are writing something new. In all likelihood it
will be several years before Freenet works as well as we'd like it to.
There is no point rewriting it in assembly language; we need to get it
WORKING, and that means the network protocol, and so on.
> Regards,
> J
Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/
ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Support mailing list
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support

Reply via email to