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