Shootout (startup)  
Author Message
Razii





PostPosted: 2008-5-6 15:18:00 Top

java-programmer, Shootout (startup)
>On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 08:00:38 -0700 (PDT), Isaac Gouy
<email***@***.com> wrote:

>Why don't you go through all...

startup benchmark...

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/benchmark.php?test=hello&lang=all

Damn! C & C++ are killing java in this benchmark. Though I discovered
a trick that improves the speed somewhat and saves some face...

With n = 200 (i.e 200 startups in continuous order).

java hello

time: 23.433s

However, just adding the flag -XX:+AggressiveHeap

java -XX:+AggressiveHeap hello

time: 9.914s

that's a huge improvement.

 
Razii





PostPosted: 2008-5-6 16:56:00 Top

java-programmer >> Shootout (startup) On Tue, 06 May 2008 02:17:45 -0500, Razii <email***@***.com> wrote:

>java -XX:+AggressiveHeap hello

I got refusal email from Isaac Gouy to use this flag in this case. But
he has no problem with adding sse2 flag whenever that helps C++
version. I wonder why the double standard?


 
Razii





PostPosted: 2008-5-7 21:50:00 Top

java-programmer >> Shootout (startup) On Tue, 06 May 2008 03:56:28 -0500, Razii <email***@***.com> wrote:

>I got refusal email from Isaac Gouy to use this flag in this case. But
>he has no problem with adding sse2

Also, with gcc version, the comments says....

* Tell GCC that we don't want atexit, we don't want to use the heap,
* and we really don't want anything. Can't even call write the
"normal"
* way, because write() isn't linked in....
*
* Compile flags are picky for this. I used:
* gcc -pipe -Wall -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -march=pentium4
-ffreestanding -nostartfiles -s -static -o start3 start3.c
*/

the gcc version doesn't even compile with cygwin. However, Gouy
refused to use -XX:+AggressiveHeap flag when it's clearly much faster
for this benchmark.