← Back to context

Comment by pron

19 hours ago

Java lost almost all those knobs a while ago (I mean they're there, but you're better off relying on the defaults). The modern GCs have one or at most two knobs remaining, and even that will become unnecessary next year. As to predictablity, you get maximal pause time of well under 1ms for heaps up to 16TB.

11 comments

pron

Reply
JackSlateur  14 hours ago

As far as I know, java has 7 GC implementations, none of which are perfect, all of which have drawbacks

Lately, they seems to work with CRIU, various heuristics, multi-stage in-process bytecode compilation ..

Java is a mess, they are working hard to avoid fixing their issue (that nobody else have, so fixes are available)

  • coldtea  13 hours ago

    >As far as I know, java has 7 GC implementations, none of which are perfect, all of which have drawbacks

    Compared to Python's, all of them are beyond perfect. And 99.9% of the time you don't even need to use anything but the default.

    • refulgentis  11 hours ago

      > Compared to Python's, all of them are beyond perfect.

      I somehow understand the situation less after reading this.

      Is Python's GC bad, or are there cyclic reference issues? Is it possible to detect cyclic references perfectly? What does beyond perfect mean? If we have 7 and 0.1% of the time you need one of the 6 that is non-default, how do we choose? Is the understated version of "Compared to Python's, all of them are beyond perfect" "I think Java's are great"? If not, what about Python's impl makes it so lackluster to any of 7 of Java's?

      3 replies →