gcj performance on Solaris 2.6

Bryce McKinlay bryce@waitaki.otago.ac.nz
Sun Jul 29 17:34:00 GMT 2001


Jeff Sturm wrote:

> I built one application library at -O0, -O2 and -O3 with the patch below,
> and at -O2 unpatched for comparison.
>
>    text    data     bss     dec     hex filename
> 1659369  247180     704 1907253  1d1a35 libjacl-O0.so
> 2474525  243612     704 2718841  297c79 libjacl-O2-unpatched.so
> 1354881  237836     704 1593421  18504d libjacl-O2.so
> 1418826  236272     704 1655802  1943fa libjacl-O3.so

I applied this patch and found it made no difference to the size of a libgcj
built with -O2. Any ideas why?

regards

Bryce.




More information about the Java mailing list