RFR (XS) 8240511: Shenandoah: parallel safepoint workers count should be ParallelGCThreads

[Aleksey Shipilev]

On 3/4/20 11:41 AM, Roman Kennke wrote:
> Ok yes, that makes sense.
> 
> That flag predates upstream integration of that code, and it wasn't
> quite clear how many threads are useful for safepoint cleanup. IIRC, I
> found that hammering it with ParallelGCThreads was overkill - on my
> machine. But you are right, hard-wiring it to 4 is certainly overkill on
> smaller machines than mine ;-)
I ran a few latency-sensitive tests on my smaller desktop, and they did not regress. I believe that
is partly because we have trimmed down the number of parallel threads with JDK-8225229. Therefore I
see no reason to keep it in. Another unnecessary GC option bites the dust.

-- 
Thanks,
-Aleksey