Re: file read and processing pretty slow. ideas?

Hi Joshua,

Yep using gcj as a direct replacement for sun's "java" vm is definitely
not the way to go.
The benefits of using jcj are really only seen if you use it as a
tradiional ahead-of-time compiler, to actually compile all your java
code into a native executable which I believe is what Hannes has
experimented with in his rhinola project:
http://mod-gcj.sourceforge.net/rhinola.html
But that's a lot of work to get Helma and all its dependencies all
compile up into a native exe and for not too much benfit that I can see
so your definitely better off just using Sun's JDK at the moment.
You might be happy to know that Sun has made Java 7 open source (under
GPL license) though some parts of the JDK they could not release due to
being third party code, so people (like Readhat/Fedora proj) are working
on packaging it all up under the moniker of 'Icedtea' :
http://fitzsim.org/blog/?p=17

Its not ready for production use at the moment, but definitely something
that will make free (well performing!) JDK a reality in the near future.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] 
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joshua Paine
> Sent: Wednesday, 18 July 2007 09:00
> To: Helma User Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Helma-user] file read and processing pretty slow. ideas?
> 
> Joshua Paine wrote:
> > Java 1.4.2 via the gcj java package that comes with Fedora Core 6
> 
> "There's your problem right there."
> 
> I got rid of FC6's default Java and installed sun's binary 
> 6u2 package for AMD64. Now runtimes for the whole thing are 
> down to 1.2 sec. So, for the record, java-1.4.2-gcj-compat is 
> totally unacceptable for running Helma, but so far Sun's 
> latest works very nicely. It's too bad it's non-free, but for 
> now I'm willing to be pragmatic and comfort myself with the 
> knowledge that it's theoretically possible to move to a free 
> Java implementation should it ever become necessary sometime 
> in The Future (when hopefully, there's an adequate one. which 
> there might already be for all I know.).
> 
> helma.File is still ~10x slower than File, though. Just 
> reading the file line by line:
> 
> With File:
> 0.061, 0.019, 0.023, 0.018, 0.018, 0.021, 0.017 With helma.File:
> 0.526, 0.343, 0.147, 0.147, 0.142, 0.143, 0.144
> 
> Ok, so actually it takes about 8x as long. Still a heck of a 
> lot longer.
> 
> -Joshua
> _______________________________________________
> Helma-user mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://helma.org/mailman/listinfo/helma-user
> 
> 
>