64-bit versus 32-bit Virtual Machines for Java

Software - Practice and Experience

Volumn 36, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 1-26

  Venstermans, Kris ^a   Eeckhout, Lieven ^a   De Bosschere, Koen ^a  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

Author keywords

64 bit versus 32 bit computing; Java; Performance evaluation; PowerPC; Virtual Machine

Indexed keywords

BENCHMARKING; COMPUTER HARDWARE; COMPUTER MONITORS; EMBEDDED SYSTEMS; INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY; QUALITY OF SERVICE;

64-BIT VERSUS 32-BIT COMPUTING; PERFORMANCE EVALUATION; VIRTUAL MACHINE;

JAVA PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE;

EID: 30544434724     PISSN: 00380644     EISSN: 1097024X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/spe.679     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Glaskowsky PN. Athlon 64 moving to mass market. Microprocessor Report, 2004.
2. Krewell K. AMD serves up Opteron. Microprocessor Report, 2003.
3. Halfhill TR. AMD and Intel harmonize on 64. Microprocessor Report, 2004.
4. Adl-Tabatabai A-R, Bharadwaj J, Cierniak M, Eng M, Fang J, Lewis BT, Murphy BR, Stichnoth JM. Improving 64-bit Java IPF performance by compressing heap references. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Code Generation and Optimization. IEEE Computer Society Press: Los Alamitos, CA, 2004; 100.
5. Alpern B et al. The Jalapeflo Virtual Machine. IBM Systems Journal 2000; 39(1):211-238.
6. Blackburn SM, Cheng P, McKinley KS. Oil and water? High performance garbage collection in Java with MMTk. Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Software Engineering. IEEE Computer Society Press: Los Alamitos, CA, 2004; 137-146.
7. Sweeney PF, Hauswirth M, Cahoon B, Cheng P, Diwan A, Grove DP, Hind MJ. Using hardware performance monitors to understand the behavior of Java applications. Proceedings of USENIX 3rd Virtual Machine Research and Technology Symposium (VM'04). USENIX Association: Berkeley, CA, 2004; 57-72.
8. Suganuma T, Ogasawara T, Takeuchi M, Yasue T, Kawahito M, Ishizaki K, Komatsu H, Nakatani T. Overview of the IBM Java just-in-time compiler. IBM Systems Journal 2000; 39(1): 175-193.
9. Behling S, Bell R, Farell P, Holthoff H, O'Connel F, Weir W. The POWER4 Processor Introduction and Tuning Guide. Redbooks. IBM Corporation, International Technical Support Organization: New York, 2001.
10. Venstermans K, De Bosschere K. JVM SPEC favours 32-bit platforms. Workshop on Signal Processing, Integrated Systems and Circuits (ProRISC), The Netherlands, November 2003. Available at: http://escher.elis.ugent.be/publ/Edocs/DOC/P103_143.pdf.
11. Dieckmann S, Hölzle U. A study of the allocation behavior of the specjvm98 Java benchmarks. Proceedings of the 13th European Conference for Object-Oriented Programming. Springer: Berlin, 1999; 92-115.
12. Chilimbi TM, Larus JR. Using generational garbage collection to implement cache-conscious data placement. Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium on Memory Management. ACM Press: New York, 1998; 37-48.
13. Shuf Y, Serrano MJ, Gupta M, Singh JP. Characterizing the memory behavior of Java workloads: A structured view and opportunities for optimizations. SIGMETRICS International Conference on Measurement and Modeling of Computer Systems. ACM Press: New York, 2001; 194-205.
14. Blackburn SM, Cheng P, McKinley KS. Myths and realities: The performance impact of garbage collection. Proceedings of the Joint International Conference on Measurement and Modeling of Computer Systems. ACM Press: New York, 2004; 25-36.
15. Li T, Kurian John L, Narayanan V, Sivasubramaniam A, Sabarinathan J, Murthy A. Using complete system simulation to characterize specjvm98 benchmarks. Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Supercomputing. ACM Press: New York, 2000; 22-33.
16. Kim J-S, Hsu Y. Memory system behavior of Java programs: Methodology and analysis. Proceedings of the 2000 ACM SIGMETRICS International Conference on Measurement and Modeling of Computer Systems. ACM Press: New York, 2000; 264-274.
17. Georges A, Buytaert D, Eeckhout L, De Bosschere K. Method-level phase behavior in Java workloads. Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications. ACM Press: New York, 2004; 270-287.
18. Eeckhout L, Georges A, De Bosschere K. How Java programs interact with virtual machines at the microarchitectural level. Proceedings of the 18th ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications. ACM Press: New York, 2003; 169-186.
19. Karlsson M, Moore KE, Hagersten E, Wood DA. Memory system behavior of Java-based middleware. Proceedings of the 9th IEEE International Symposium on High-Performance Computer Architecture. IEEE Computer Society Press: Los Alamitos, CA, 2003; 217-228.
20. Cain HW, Rajwar R, Marden M, Lipasti MH. An architectural evaluation of Java TPC-W. Proceedings of the 7th IEEE International Symposium on High-Performance Computer Architecture. IEEE Computer Society Press: Los Alamitos, CA, 2001; 229-240.
21. Radhakrishnan R, Vijaykrishnan N, Kurian John L, Sivasubramaniam A, Rubio J, Sabarinathan J. Java runtime systems: Characterization and architectural implications. IEEE Transactions on Computing 2001; 50(2): 131-146.
22. Seshadri P, Mericas A. Workload characterization of multithreaded Java servers on two PowerPC processors. IEEE 4th Annual Workshop on Workload Characterization. Kluwer Academic: Secaucus, NJ, 2001.
23. Mogul JC, Bartlett JF, Mayo RN, Srivastava A. Performance implications of multiple pointer sizes. USENIX Winter. USENIX Association: Berkeley, CA, 1995; 187-200.