| ▲ | immibis 5 days ago |
| Java's ZGC claims O(1) pause time of 0.05ms. (As with any low-pause collector, the rest of your code is uniformly slower by some percentage because it has to make sure not to step on the toes of the concurrently-running collector.) |
|
| ▲ | Ygg2 5 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| > Java's ZGC claims O(1) pause time of 0.05ms In practice it's actually closer to 10ms for large heaps. Large being around 220 GB. |
|
| ▲ | riku_iki 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| With Java, the issue is that each allocated object carries significant memory footprint, as result total memory consumption is much higher compared to C++: https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/... |
| |
| ▲ | igouy 4 days ago | parent [-] | | The benchmarks game shows memory use with default GC settings (as a way to uncover space-time tradeoffs), mostly for tiny tiny programs that hardly use memory. Less difference — mandelbrot, k-nucleotide, reverse-complement, regex-redux — when the task requires memory to be used. Less with GraalVM native-image: https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/... | | |
| ▲ | riku_iki 4 days ago | parent [-] | | > Less difference — mandelbrot, k-nucleotide, reverse-complement, regex-redux — when the task requires memory to be used. yes, I referred to benchmarks with large memory consumption, where Java still uses from 2 to 10(as in binary tree task) more memory, which is large overhead. |
|
|
