Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

How much would Oracle pay to acquire this?

It's disconcerting that they need to mention "512GB", as if they found that "pauseless garbage collection was" not a big enough selling point (perhaps because for most server applications - where the big money Java apps are - individual responsiveness doesn't matter all that much).

It's also disconcerting, because (it seems to me) that big apps are increasingly a thing of the past, as we move to massively distributed smaller, slower processes - each individual JVM with its own smaller memory needs. Big apps seem to be an upmarket niche, disappearing fast. Whereas the great strength of pauseless gc is in realtime client-side apps - like mobile devices.

I think these guys have done something great here, and it would be a shame to see them pushed upmarket into oblivion, when they could create an entirely new disruption based on Java - perhaps (finally) fulfilling its promise... (and for the java-haters, also for other JVM-based languages).

EDIT Azul tech previously on HN (links include explanations IIRC): http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=810506 --- http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2022723 --- http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2058476



So in theory you are correct, but the reality on the ground is that 96gb in a box is getting to be pretty standard now.

Also the other thing to remember is that the standard java GCs dont reliably work under all workloads above 2-4GB. You can make a 8gb or 16gb heap work, but if you hit a full-compaction your JVM will go MIA for MINUTES at a time. So you can't even scale to a 16gb ram heap.

The 512GB is for the previous customers who do in fact use heaps of that size.


Thanks, I guess needing over 2-4GB is not terribly high-end; and even if I'm right about disruption, demand will keep creeping up over time at both high and low end. Even phones have 1GB these days.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: