Re: 32 bit JVM -- MIDRANGE-L

Subject: Re: 32 bit JVM
From: Scott Klement <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 15:31:29 -0600
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l>
List-help: <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:midrange-l@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

I haven't noticed any significant performance difference, myself.

But IBM is saying that the "J9" tools are the future -- so I've been using the 32-bit J9 tool for most of my work lately.

On 3/12/2010 1:07 PM, Chris Bipes wrote:

Would anyone advise for or against changing the default JVM from Classic
to the 32 bit version on V5R4?

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2026 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.