Java performance on AMD64

[Kris Kennaway]

On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 04:59:12PM +1000, Michael Vince wrote:
> Kris Kennaway wrote:
> >On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 12:32:53PM +1000, Michael Vince wrote:
> >  
> >>Hey All,
> >>I been benchmarking Diablo Java under AMD64 on 6.2R and using the same 
> >>methods I posted a while ago detailed somewhat here
> >>http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-java/2006-August/005576.html
> >>
> >>The difference here is that libthr now works under Amd64.
> >>But it appears libthr to be about half the speed of libpthread under 
> >>AMD64 mode which is the opposite behavior when using it under i386.
> >>    
> >
> >That's contrary to my benchmarks :( Dunno what might be wrong though,
> >assuming you have checked all the obvious.
> >
> >Kris
> >  
> OK,
> I did more testing and it appears the 6.1R Diablo Java binary package on 
> Amd64 on 6.2/libthr appears to be the problem, it's as much as 60% 
> slower then libpthread.
> 
> On 6.2R Amd64 I built the ports version of jdk1.5 and libthr appeared to 
> be around 25% faster then libpthread.
> But using the Diablo jdk package for 6.1R on 6.2 under libpthread is 
> even faster by around 15% over anything I could do for any combination 
> of Java and libthr.
> 
> I would guess that a new 6.2R Amd64 Diablo package would probably turn 
> it around again for libthr and I would guess it would again around 20% 
> faster then anything I can get from Java under AMD64 6.2R, what's going 
> on here exactly I don't know.

That's weird, I thought the diablo package was just compiled from
jdk1.5.  It could be there was a performance regression from a change
made to the port after 6.1 - it would be great if you can follow it up
with the java@ people.

Kris
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-performance/attachments/20070420/12eccc4e/attachment.pgp