[talk] Python

[Sujit K M]

On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 5:30 PM, Edward Capriolo <edlinuxguru at gmail.com> wrote:
> The java class file format is well documented. Basically one pointer to the
> runtime class of the object followed by the object.

So you mean to say Class file size on the filesystem is the Object Size.

>
> If a given language is reference counted each object has one extra atomic
> field to count references.

So you mean to say garbage collection.

>
> If a given language does not have objects but instead uses maps (that repeat
> the fields evey instance) that is going to be a more large object in memory.

Big data I guess.

>
> While i am not a large expert in this i believe javas approach is like a c
> struct with the exception the first word size bytes are a pointer to the
> type of class so that instances can be runtime inspected.
>
> Java also has a very clever system for compressing 64 bit pointers.. see
> compressedOOPs option. I have not heard much of this optimization anywhere
> else.

Zlib I guess.

>
> On Thursday, April 28, 2016, Sujit K M <kmsujit at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Anecdotal. Keep in mind I have tested this and you can create 'a lot
>> > more
>> > objects' given the same RAM than many other popular non java languages.
>> > :)
>>
>> Could you please clarify further? I mean does it involve a object size
>> on the JVM.
>> How to measure the size occupied by the Object? How much extra space the
>> JVM
>> needs? What is JDK Feature that Let's you claim this?
>>
>> I have serious questions regarding this claim. As Interpreted or JIT
>> compiled languages
>> should in reality occupy more space.
>>
>> >
>> > On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 4:13 PM, Pete Wright <pete at nomadlogic.org>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 04/26/2016 03:56 AM, Brian Coca wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> As many a Java dev has told me: "the only problem is that you did not
>> >>> install enough RAM, just add it, it's cheap!"
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> and therein is the issue - in practice i've found that by adding more
>> >> memory to a JVM heap will tend to worsen GC pauses, especially for
>> >> latency
>> >> sensitive operations.  then you get to do all sorts of fun stuff like
>> >> storing cached objects outside of the JVM or lord knows what.
>> >>
>> >> i spent about 3 months trying to help a team tune their java app when
>> >> they
>> >> noticed it would periodically show latencies of several seconds. they
>> >> kept
>> >> adding more memory to the heap, which made things worse.  once we
>> >> turned on
>> >> debugging metrics for GC it became painfully apparent that due to the
>> >> huge
>> >> heap that they had allocated GC was taking ages to complete and
>> >> stopping to
>> >> world in the process.  good times :)
>> >>
>> >> -pete
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Pete Wright
>> >> pete at nomadlogic.org
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> talk mailing list
>> >> talk at lists.nycbug.org
>> >> http://lists.nycbug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > talk mailing list
>> > talk at lists.nycbug.org
>> > http://lists.nycbug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> talk mailing list
>> talk at lists.nycbug.org
>> http://lists.nycbug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
>
>
>
> --
> Sorry this was sent from mobile. Will do less grammar and spell check than
> usual.