× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



Peter,

It was interesting to read Andy's comments about JVM performance.  I'm no
expert on JVM performance but I did just do a little looking at the
specjbb2000 benchmark.  The IBM iSeries benchmark
(http://www.spec.org/osg/jbb2000/results/res2004q4/jbb2000-20041012-00259.ht
ml) is about eighth on the list for performance results.  The spec say it
does test garbage collection (http://www.spec.org/jbb2000/docs/faq.html#Q7)
and that garbage collection does affect the results
(http://www.spec.org/jbb2000/docs/faq.html#Q38).  I don't see IBM using the
mentioned input.forcegc property (which will move garbage collection to
between warehouse run in the test) but it's possible they did that.  I do
see some option for (os400.pool.size 4096) and (os400.aggressive.heap) in
the IBM results which might be tweaks for garbage collection.  The spec
mentions a large heap reducing the need for garbage collection.

Is this Specjbb200 benchmark what Andy's referring to when he talks about
IBMs performance benchmarks not being worth much?

thanks,
Paul


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.