Re: native code performance

Marco Canini wrote:
> Hi,
> I've been experimenting with using gcj native binary compilation for the 
> following problem.
> I'm seeking to integrate the weka machine learning toolkit in a C++ 
> program. Weka is 100% java code.
> I've learned about CNI and it sounds quite an appealing solution for the 
> integration part. However, before writing the C++ code, I tried to see 
> what the performance are when the java code is compiled to a native binary.
> Basically what I did was the following:
> I compiled the weka source code using gcj (ecj) to a .jar (bytecode).
> I wrote a simple program that actually uses the toolkit to run a 
> classifier.
> I compiled this program into a class.
> I linked everything into a native binary with the -findirect-dispatch 
> option.
> 
> As I'm new to gcj I might have done something wrong during this process, 
> but it seems alright given my understanding of the gcj manual.
> Although I actually don't know where I should have enabled the 
> optimizations (-O2)
> 
> Now comes the unattended result.
> I ran the native binary and it took 13.4s to execute a classification test.
> When using sun's java, the program (in this case the .class) executes in 
> 3.2s!
> I had expected a native binary to outperform the VM.
> 
> So here my question is very simple: is this result realistic or i'm just 
> missing the magic to speed the native binary up?

There has just been a similar question on the list about bad 
performance. Once he used optimization (-On), I think he was happy.
So try with optimization. Just add for instance -O2 to all gcj calls if 
you don't know where it's needed...


Hope that helps
Marco


> Thanks
> 
>