Home > Article > Backend Development > Why Does Go Offer Sub-Millisecond GC Pauses While JVMs Historically Struggle?
Delving into the Architectural Differences Affecting GC Pauses in JVM vs. Go
The persistent struggle with high GC pauses in JVM has prompted comparisons to Go's exceptional ability to reduce pauses to sub 1ms. To shed light on this disparity, let's delve into the architectural constraints that influence GC performance in each platform.
Go's Pause-Optimization Strategy
Go's garbage collector (GCGC) prioritizes minimizing GC pauses, leveraging a combination of techniques:
JVM's Balancing Act
In contrast, JVM GCs traditionally focus on throughput and compaction to improve performance on large server-class machines. They employ generational collection and compaction mechanisms, which present the following tradeoffs:
Recent Innovations in JVM
Recognizing the need for improved pause times, the JVM ecosystem has developed new collectors:
Architectural Considerations
The architectural differences between Go and JVM GCs stem from their distinct design philosophies and performance priorities:
In conclusion, the architectural differences in the design of Go's GCGC and JVM GCs have implications for their respective pause times. Go prioritizes pause reduction through simplicity and concurrency, while JVM GCs have traditionally sacrificed pause time for throughput and compaction. However, advancements in JVM technology, particularly ZGC and Shenandoah, are bridging the gap, offering pause times comparable to Go.
The above is the detailed content of Why Does Go Offer Sub-Millisecond GC Pauses While JVMs Historically Struggle?. For more information, please follow other related articles on the PHP Chinese website!