RFC: Epsilon GC JEP

Aleksey Shipilev shade at redhat.com
Tue Jul 18 13:46:40 UTC 2017

Hi Thomas,

(reading the rest a bit later)

On 07/18/2017 03:34 PM, Thomas Schatzl wrote:
> I would like to expand this cost/benefit analysis a bit; I think the
> most contentious point brought up by Erik has been the develop vs.
> experimental flag issue.

> For that, let me present you my understanding of the size and costs of
> making this an experimental (actually product) vs. develop flag for the
> intended target group as presented here.

> Overall, on the question of develop vs. experimental option, I would tend to
> prefer a develop option. In this area there simply seem to be too many
> downsides compared to the upsides for an extremely limited user group.
Ok, suppose we want to hide it from most users. Now we need an option that is
available in release builds (because you want to test native GC performance),
but not openly available in release builds. Which option type is that? I thought
"experimental" is closest to that.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/attachments/20170718/1a64ca9f/signature.asc>

More information about the hotspot-gc-dev mailing list