News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Java JIT vs. Java AOT vs. Go for Small, Short-Lived Processes. Parent comment

Re:Java JIT vs. Java AOT vs. Go for Small, Short-Lived Proce... by c048 on Tuesday December 24, 2019 @05:16PM (#21875307)
Look into Micronauts and GraalVM. Simple apps have shown to have startup times of sub 20 ms and memory footprints als low as 18 mb.

It's simply not fair of a comparison to GO when you drag in heavy frameworks like Spring, Hibernate, etc... .

I'd also like to add that even without GraalVM and Micronauts, an app that requires 1 Gig of memory seems to be indicative of its architecture and not the choice of language.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Java JIT vs. Java AOT vs. Go for Small, Short-Lived Proce... by nobleach on Wednesday December 25, 2019 @12:29PM (#21879465)
Micronaut and Quarkus are fantastic! Those startup times are exactly what you're looking for if you want to run a cloud function or lambda. I will say, that for a standard microservice, where startup time is not as important, I'd not compile to GraalVM. The cpu/memory overhead to create a GraalVM image is pretty intense. Furthermore, GraalVM doesn't optimize as it warms up like HotSpot does. That need may depend on your use case. I'm currently running Micronaut services in production that take around 5 seconds to start on JDK 1.8. The Spring Boot equivalent..... well.... 10 times that amount of time maybe?
[ Parent | on HN ]