Nashorn works in real life

[Marcus Lagergren]

Part of the performance work requires us moving to a more lazy execution model, which should bring part of the bootstrapping problem away. At the time I can't say if this is 8.0 or the first service upgrade, though.

/M

On Oct 14, 2013, at 2:58 PM, Tal Liron <tal.liron at threecrickets.com> wrote:

> 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
>