Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #27517
| From | Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: java8 up to 6x slower than java7 |
| Date | 2014-02-15 12:55 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <bm92tcFhk82U1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | <29a51a94-8f9a-41b1-980f-e8c13e2d11a2@googlegroups.com> |
On 15.02.2014 12:00, Dennis Haupt wrote: > i wrote a little pathfinder. i can run it under the jdk7 update 51 > and it is done in ~20 seconds. under java8, since a long series of > builds, a certain part involving deeeeeeeeeep recursion takes ~60 > seconds instead of 10. i suspected the hashmap change of java8 to be > the culprit since i perform a lot of put operations, but that's not > it - i used the standard hashmap from scala to be 100% sure the > hashmap can't be the reason (or is), and indeed, i get the same > performance difference between java7 and 8 with the same hashmap my > profiler (yourkit) shows that java8 spends a much bigger amount of > time on garbage collection and allocated more objects. if i take a > memory snapshot, can see that the final results are equal, so i have > more temporary objects. yourkit also shows that more objects are > allocated using java8. what is up with that? all i do in the critical > method is creating arraylists and performing puts, contains and gets > on a hashmap, and the recursive call. the time is, according to > yourkit, spend in the method itself, not inside the hashmap or > arraylist constructor. any ideas? Does your profiler not show allocation hotspots? Other than that it's just wild speculation without seeing the code. Cheers robert
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
java8 up to 6x slower than java7 Dennis Haupt <d.haupt82@gmail.com> - 2014-02-15 03:00 -0800
Re: java8 up to 6x slower than java7 Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2014-02-15 12:26 +0100
Re: java8 up to 6x slower than java7 Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2014-02-15 12:28 +0100
Re: java8 up to 6x slower than java7 Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2014-02-15 12:52 +0100
Re: java8 up to 6x slower than java7 Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2014-02-16 13:10 +0100
Re: java8 up to 6x slower than java7 Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2014-02-16 14:38 +0100
Re: java8 up to 6x slower than java7 Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2014-02-16 14:43 +0100
Re: java8 up to 6x slower than java7 Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2014-02-16 14:53 +0100
Re: java8 up to 6x slower than java7 Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2014-02-16 20:27 +0100
Re: java8 up to 6x slower than java7 Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2014-02-16 20:36 +0100
Re: java8 up to 6x slower than java7 Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2014-02-17 18:55 +0100
Re: java8 up to 6x slower than java7 Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-02 20:52 +0100
Re: java8 up to 6x slower than java7 Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2014-03-03 11:53 +0100
Re: java8 up to 6x slower than java7 Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2014-03-03 17:16 +0100
Re: java8 up to 6x slower than java7 Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2014-03-03 19:53 +0100
Re: java8 up to 6x slower than java7 Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2014-03-03 13:44 -0800
Re: java8 up to 6x slower than java7 Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2014-02-16 11:24 -0800
Re: java8 up to 6x slower than java7 Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2014-02-15 12:55 +0100
Re: java8 up to 6x slower than java7 "Qu0ll" <Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com> - 2014-02-15 23:42 +1100
Re: java8 up to 6x slower than java7 Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2014-02-16 00:25 -0800
csiph-web