gcj slower than JVM on RedHat/s390?

Wed Apr 2 21:01:00 GMT 2003

Allocation of short-lived memory is also known to be slower in gcj than many other JVMs. (The allocation path is still suboptimal, the collector root set is too large, and the collector is not generational. On the positive side, real code usually allocates longer-lived objects, so we do relatively better.)
It would be interesting to see whether the statically linked executable is appreciably faster. Gcj sometimes gets hurt by the number of dynamic library calls into libgcj. But their cost is very platform dependent.
Hans
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeff Sturm [mailto:jsturm@one-point.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2003 10:05 AM
> To: Andy Faibishenko
> Cc: java@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: gcj slower than JVM on RedHat/s390?
>>> On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Andy Faibishenko wrote:
> > The doSomething() method performs a bunch of string 
> comparisons and
> > assignments. Nothing tricky.
>> String operations are suspected to be suboptimal in libgcj. 
> I'm not aware
> of any serious attempts to profile and/or improve them, however.
>> Jeff
>