Nashorn works in real life

[Tal Liron]

Performance per se is hard to test in data-driven web applications: the 
complete route uses the database, which is always orders of magnitude 
slower than that of the code execution. And in Prudence, the cache is 
handled entirely in Java code, so it won't even run any Nashorn when 
pulling pages from the cache. I may need to devise a different kind of 
test, more CPU-bound, specifically to benchmark Nashorn vs. Rhino. If 
you guys have any ideas (possibly that you are using in Avatar.js?) I'd 
be happy to try them.

However, I do some have news for the bootstrapping process (based on 
Sincerity). And the news is not good: Nashorn takes significantly longer 
to compile than Rhino, resulting in a slower bootstrap overall. I 
believe this could be much alleviated by allowing us to cache compiled 
bytecode to disk (Scripturian does this for Rhino), but I've been told 
that this feature won't be available for Nashorn. So, every bootstrap 
involves compiling the JavaScript all over again, and it's not fast.

So, actually for the one area in the software stack where I hoped 
Nashorn's performance would shine--bootstrapping--I'm not seeing the 
benefits yet.

On 10/14/2013 08:48 PM, Marcus Lagergren wrote:
> Nice one, Tal! Everything works and you are happy with behavior? 
> Faster than Rhino? (we are doing some additional performance work 
> right now)
>
> /M