Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 16:07:48 +0100 From: Adam Nealis <adamn@criterion.canon.co.uk> To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Java Message-ID: <35D452C4.28ABD074@criterion.canon.co.uk> References: <Pine.BSF.4.00.9808131337200.11633-100000@resnet.uoregon.edu> <35D40110.61FEE14F@criterion.canon.co.uk> <19980814092315.A1975@drmemory.fnal.gov>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Richard M. Neswold wrote: > If memory serves, didn't Adam Nealis say: > > > > http://www.javaworld.com/javaworld/jw-00-1998/jw-00-volanomark.html > > > > The FreeBSD (1.1.5 was tested) came in last 8(, beaten by a Linux (1.1.6) > > version. > > The article does state, however: > > "The Linux and FreeBSD virtual machines do quite well considering > that neither of them have a just-in-time compiler or native > threads." > > So the author wasn't running Kaffe. In this context, FreeBSD/Linux > performance wasn't too shabby. I agree. Obviously native threads would adversely affect performance. I was trying to show what, in my view, was a pretty comprehensive review. More impressive was the "write once, run in lots of places" aspect of Java. Normally I see that Linux, and more often, FreeBSD are excluded from this sort of thing, often for no good reason that I can see. BTW, what is Kaffe? Adam. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?35D452C4.28ABD074>