Re: gcj/freenet status update 20020509

[Goran Thyni <goran at kirra dot net>]

On Fri, May 10, 2002 at 12:05:16PM +1200, Bryce McKinlay wrote:
> >* lowered max threads to 20
> Any idea why lowering the max threads was needed? GCJ's threads should 
> be just as scalable as any other native-threaded VM on linux, if not 
> more so.

This is not a problem with gcj (same overload with J2DK)
more like too little CPU compared too the bandwidth.
Too many request at the time load my computer too much.
"nice" is an alternative way to impose a limit but
maximumThreads works better for me since this a desktop
computer. nice is probably a better choice an a server.

> It would certainly be interesting to see a comparison of memory and CPU 
> usage between a "-O2" compiled freenet and the JDK.

I'll think how to do something like that.
Anyway, the "-O2" compiled version has much better response time in
the web interfaces than the "-O0" version.

regards,
-- 
Göran Thyni

Attachment: msg00105/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature