Re:Peter Lawrey Describes Petabyte JVMs
by needusername on Sunday March 15, 2015 @12:01PM
(#9206927)
> What's your point?
JVM development is slow. Things take years to a decade. If we want to have a GC that's better than G1 a decade from now we have to start now. G1 does not have an order of magnitude improvement in stw pauses in it. It may be good (or acceptable depending on where you stand) today but a decade from now we need something better.
The best features in the world are useless if you can't use them because of prohibitive licensing cost.
My experience with G1 has been a higher CPU consumption overall, but a very significant reduction in worst-case STW pause times. It works especially well for "session scope" objects: objects that are born together and die together, but may live for a relatively long time (seconds to minutes). I am not aware of any other runtime with GCs that even come close to the JVM's.
I am also not aware of any other profiler with such depth of reporting and such low overhead as JFR.
The work on Graal will continue for years, but when it is ready, it will be way ahead of the curve.
Innovation in the JVM is vibrant, and we're getting new, extremely powerful features at a good pace. The fact that each of those features takes years to implement well only proves the emphasis on big advancements (although minor advancements, like the JIT control feature in Java 9, are also made regularly).