Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 10:47:55 -0700 From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: SHUDO Kazuyuki <shudoh@muraoka.info.waseda.ac.jp> Cc: freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Porting java stuff? Proposal? Message-ID: <199812311747.KAA10105@mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <199812310744.QAA28564@cafe.muraoka.info.waseda.ac.jp> References: <199812310651.XAA07977@mt.sri.com> <199812310744.QAA28564@cafe.muraoka.info.waseda.ac.jp>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > My understanding is that JDK for FreeBSD make use of C > > > version of interpreter instead of assembly language > > > version as executeJava_p5.*. Is this right? > > > > That is correct, but we weren't that much slower than the Linux JDK, > > which *does* use the assembly language version of executeJava. > > I feel that FreeBSD JDK is pretty slower than Linux JDK. > > With Linpack benchmark for Java (*), > Linux JDK117 on PentiumPro/200MHz results 1.357 Mflops/s, > FreeBSD JDK117 on PentiumII/233MHz results 0.734 Mflops/s. > Java interpreter shows these results, no JIT. > > (*) Linpack Benchmark -- Java Version > http://www.netlib.org/benchmark/linpackjava/ > > I wonder why isn't FreeBSD port based on Linux port. It is. As a matter of fact, the Linux port uses FreeBSD patches and vice-versa. The only *large* differences are: 1) ELF support (The FreeBSD JDK uses a.out) 2) Warning support (The Linux version has casts all over the place to avoid warnings which provide no functional differences on the x86.) 3) Kernel support (Linux uses poll, not select). And, recently they also added multi-threaded support because the Linux kernel has basic multithreading. Compare older Linux releases to older FreeBSD release and the differences should be less stark. Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199812311747.KAA10105>