Re: iSeries JVM version

java400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 01/23/2005 02:15:46 PM:

> I just found out that the IBM JVMs for the iSeries have basically
> sucked.  We knew that from our own experience, but the truth is that
> those things ran at roughly 1/8th the horsepower of the current 1.4.2
> JVM.

So *that's* what a 5HP Evinrude sounds like to a hungry fish...  :-)

Um, dunno what you heard, or from where, but let me set the record
straight:  any newly-published iSeries specJBB2000 numbers were run
on the latest iSeries *hardware* available, but the venerable iSeries
implementation of the Java virtual machine spec is still underneath.

> I was originally not happy with the idea of getting a standard JVM for
> the iSeries and losing some of our platform uniqueness, but if it means
> an eight-fold increase in performance, I think I'm okay with it...

FWIW, you've had a "standard JVM" on the iSeries since day one; the
'standard' a JVM implementation has to meet is the Java Virtual
Machine specification.  The mantra?  "Collaborate on specification:
compete on implementation."  It may be too soon to tell, but based
on your glowing recommendations we appear to be succeeding in that
endeavor.

HTH.

-blair

  ___   _           Blair Wyman                  IBM Rochester
 ( /_)  /  _  ' _   (507)253-2891            blairw@xxxxxxxxxx
__/__)_/_<_/_/_/_'  Opinions expressed may not be those of IBM