From owner-freebsd-java Thu Aug 3 21:36:39 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Received: from public.bta.net.cn (public.bta.net.cn [202.96.0.97]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CA3237B6AE for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 21:36:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from robinson@netrinsics.com) Received: from netrinsics.com ([202.108.133.85]) by public.bta.net.cn (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAB28421 for ; Fri, 4 Aug 2000 12:32:36 +0800 (GMT) Received: (from robinson@localhost) by netrinsics.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA03273; Fri, 4 Aug 2000 12:37:21 +0800 (+0800) (envelope-from robinson) Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 12:37:21 +0800 (+0800) From: Michael Robinson Message-Id: <200008040437.MAA03273@netrinsics.com> To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Linux JDK on FreeBSD Sender: owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Nate Williams writes: >That's FUD. Sun intends to give us access to everything the Linux folks >have. The problem at this point is paperwork, and I'm yelling again at >the BSDi folks to help me out here. (Just sent an email off a few >minutes ago0> Well, that's simultaneously encouraging and discouraging. Encouraging, because there's hope for good FreeBSD Java; discouraging because BSDi still hasn't recognized the value of pulling their head out. >No, he's serious. Currently FreeBSD is working on an implementation of >'real scalable' kernel threads. This is not to be confused with the >current kernel threads implementation that are used in Linux, and >emulated by FreeBSD quite well. > >These actually scale, and will allow FreeBSD to scale much better than >Linux does. (See recent benchmarks why the current threading model >doesn't work well, or any threading paper). Well, that's great, and I look forward to the day when it's deployed and stable. And if that day comes in less than two years, I'll be pleasantly surprised. >> Well, I would expect the Linux emulator to be suitably modified to do the >> mapping appropriately, because, again, Java is not the only product facing >> this issue. > >??? You don't understand. It can't do JNI simply because the JVM is >responsible for doing the mapping. The emulator folks can't be expected >to go off and figure out exactly what the emulator is doing w/regards. I was not referring to JNI. I was referring to kernel threads. Do you claim that it is unreasonable to expect the Linux compatibility layer to map Linux kernel thread calls to FreeBSD native kernel threads? >> Right now I can install Red Hat and run Oracle (with support, no >> less), on an 8-way Xeon box with reasonable scalability. >You and I have a much definition for 'reasonable scalability'. If you >had a Java program with 8 threads in it written with very little The above referred to Oracle. >However, methinks you're a wee bit over the top with Java. Java is not >*nearly* as big as it was a couple years back. Sun screwed the pooch >with it's licensing issue, and Java 1.3 is still not supported well on >most platforms. Yes, Java screwed the pooch with the licensing, as well as with over-promising and under-delivering in performance, features, and platform parity. However, Java is now on the comeback trail, with J2EE emerging as the enterprise component architecture of choice. Every major application server either supports, or plans to support J2EE. That means servers, lots of servers, running business logic on Java. For small-mid-sized businesses who can't afford Solaris (or W2K, for that matter, now that it's no longer the "cheap OS"), they've got Linux and a promise of maybe someday soon FreeBSD. >Heck, for that matter, only *two* platforms have a >usable/stable JDK1.3 platform (and Linux isn't one of them, although it >has a 'beta' quality release). I have had no problems with the 1.3 Linux beta refresh, under FreeBSD, except for anything that uses threads under the HotSpot VM. Under "classic", it's perfectly stable (and slow). It's a major improvement over the previous beta. I can reasonably expect a release-quality JDK1.3 for Linux before the end of the year. With the facts currently available to me, I have no such reasonable expectation of such from FreeBSD. >You don't have all the facts available to you. Well, I'm not going to apologize for the unavailability of facts. >Note that other 'vendors' are doing a much better job of influence, by >providing resources and encouragement, not bitching and moaning. Where do I send my check for the "native FreeBSD JDK1.3 by 4Q00" fund? -Michael Robinson To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-java" in the body of the message