Weekly Edition Return to the Development page |
Natively compiled Eclipse
A group of hackers from the
GCJ project have been
awarded the Fast Free Eclipse Prize:
Andrew Haley and Tom Tromey led a team of gcj (GNU Compiler for Java)
hackers at Red Hat who won the Fast Free Eclipse prize. The Fast Free
Eclipse challenge was to produce a free and fast version of the
Eclipse development environment that would run on a completely Free
Software system like GNU/Linux. Tom and Andrew not only accomplished
all the goals of the original challenge, but they went far beyond that
to produce the fasted Eclipse based development environment to
date. This accomplishment means that the Free Software movement now
has another high productivity environment for creating software that
can be freely used, modified and distributed.
"Eclipse is a kind of universal tool platform - an open extensible IDE for anything and nothing in particular." The Eclipse project FAQ is quite comprehensive, it covers many questions about the project.
Eclipse is an open source software development project dedicated to providing a robust, full-featured, commercial-quality, industry platform for the development of highly integrated tools. It is composed of three projects, the Eclipse Project, the Eclipse Tools Project and the EclipseTechnology Project, each of which is overseen by a Project Management Committee (PMC) and governed by its Project Charter.
Eclipse is being distributed under IBM's Common Public License. Downloads of Eclipse are available here. RPM packages of Natively compiled Eclipse, as well as dependency packages have been made available by Red Hat. Thanks to Mark Wielaard. (Log in to post comments)
Performance Posted Aug 7, 2003 9:42 UTC (Thu) by walles (subscriber, #954) [Link] Call me a sceptic, but I'd like to see some numbers backing the claim of the GCJ built Eclipse performing better than a JVM.I don't doubt for a second that the GCJ build starts up faster than any JVM (as the JVM needs to compile the Java code before it can be run), but it would surprize me if GCJ's runtime performance is anywhere near that of any sane JVM. Numbers, anyone?
Performance Posted Aug 7, 2003 10:07 UTC (Thu) by Carl (guest, #824) [Link] These are older benchmarks from before some of the Eclipse work (not all of which has been merged back into the main gcc tree yet), but they give an indication of how well gcj does against "the competition":
Performance Posted Aug 9, 2003 14:49 UTC (Sat) by walles (subscriber, #954) [Link] The Free VM benchmarks do indeed demonstrate that gcj beats the other Free JVMs. Thus, if you run only Free JVMs, gcj will indeed be an improvement.Regarding the second set of benchmarks: Thus, according to those benchmarks, IBM seems to beat gcj most of the time on runtime performance, even though IBM do bounds checking all of the time which gcj doesn't (look at the build flags for gcj). SUN on the other hand seem to lose fairly vs gcj in some of these benchmarks. If anything, the above benchmarks hint at that Eclipse might be faster on IBM's VM than on gcj. To have some real evidence of that however, one would need bencmarks run from inside of Eclipse using the same VM instance as Eclipse.
Performance Posted Aug 7, 2003 11:14 UTC (Thu) by ag (guest, #13761) [Link] This will give you some idea. The Eclipse java compiler can be extracted from Eclipse in order to produce a stand-alone command line tool (ecj).This is a typical native ecj build (of rhino, in this example). I used the $ time find ./ -name \*.java | xargs ecj -bootclasspath /home/green/tools/FSF/HEAD/i/share/java/libgcj-3.4 .jar -repeat 5 -log out.log real 0m7.136s Here's the same compiler being run with IBM's jre... $ time find ./ -name \*.java | xargs java org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.batch.Main -bootclasspath /home/green/tools/FSF/HEAD/i/share/java/libgcj-3.4 .jar -repeat 5 -log out.log real 0m20.863s An easy way to build ecj for yourself is to get it from here: http://sources.redhat.com/rhug
Performance Posted Aug 9, 2003 14:23 UTC (Sat) by walles (subscriber, #954) [Link] You start up the JVM five times. As I said, gcj's startup time should be much better than that of any JVM, and you just demonstrated that.This doesn't say anything about the runtime performance.
Oops Posted Aug 9, 2003 14:57 UTC (Sat) by walles (subscriber, #954) [Link] Sorry, should've read what you wrote in its entirety instead of just brushing you off. Could you try running the same thing with -repeat 1000 instead?Considering Eclipse is probably run for hours at a time, a seven second benchmark (in the gcj case) may not do IBM's VM justice. Other than the short time it ran, I'd say that's a reasonable benchmark.
|
Copyright © 2003, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds
Powered by Rackspace Managed Hosting.