JMH vs Google Caliper..

[Kevin Burton]

Is Google Caliper DOA?  No recent activity on the list... the last release was a long long time ago (TM).

I assume JMH is the winner ?

Any other alternatives I should be looking at?

[Nathan Tippy]

I had high hopes for Caliper but a few months ago I started migrating over to JMH and I have no regrets.

[Daniel Mitterdorfer]

I've researched quite a bit about various benchmarking frameworks. To the best of my knowledge, Caliper is the only "serious" alternative to JMH. However, Aleksey has already pointed out a few weaknesses of Caliper in another thread: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/mechanical-sympathy/m4opvy4xq3U/h-n4eNw2SmoJ

I'd definitely go with JMH. It already covers a lot of issues that could otherwise mess up a benchmark, the user base is definitely growing and the 1.0 release is just around the corner.

Bye

Daniel

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mechanical-sympathy" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mechanical-symp...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Wojciech Kudla]

On top of what has been already said I'd add pluggable profilers in JMH.
Absolutely invaluable. Especially perfasm.
JMH totally wins the competition

--

[Nitsan Wakart]

And JMH 1.0 is here :-), this was sent earlier today to jmh-dev:

"Hi,

On March 28, 2013, we had released the very first public version of JMH.
Today, seventeen months and almost a thousand commits later, we hit the
major milestone in our project: the release of JMH 1.0. This marks our
belief the API and the harness itself is stable, reliable, and
dependable. The artefacts for JMH 1.0 are already available at Maven
Central [1].

We will continue working towards improving the harness and/or APIs, and
we already have quite a few of non-critical issues [2] found by
community to fix and polish. Please continue using JMH and contribute
the issues, fixes, and general suggestions back! You, the community, are
essential to keep the project alive.

We would like to take the rest of this note to credit those involved in
the effort, in any capacity:

* Anders Astrand, Staffan Friberg, and Henrik Loef, who have developed
the initial version of the harness for internal use back in 2011.

* Donald Smith, Dalibor Topic, and Cecilia Borg, who have shepherded
the initial contribution of JMH under Codetools umbrella in OpenJDK, and
who are still providing the project management guidance for it.

* Sergey Kuksenko, who contributed immensely in refactoring the JMH
internals before it became public, as well as providing the internal
reviews and feedback for the JMH features and improvements

* Evgeny Mandrikov, who consistently helps us with the releases to
Maven Central.

* Nitsan Wakart, Daniel Mitterdorfer, Julien Ponge, Richard Warburton,
and other authors who provided the solid stories and tutorials on using
JMH, as well as providing the invaluable feedback on user experience.

* Bernd Eckenfels, Joe Kearney, Aggelos Biboudis, Chris Vest, Dmitry
Vyazelenko, Claes Redestad, Dmitry Chuyko, Julien Nicolaund, Tom Deneau,
Roman Leventov, Henri Tremblay, Ivan Gerasimov, Gilles Duboscq, Clement
Mathieu and many others participating in mailing list discussions, often
culminating in code contributions.

* Konrad Malawski, Cedric Champeau, Gleb Smirnov, Nikita Artyushov,
Brian Harris and many others contributing to various integrations to
SBT, Gradle, Jenkins, IntelliJ IDEA, etc.

Cheers, and Thank You!

Enjoy the JMH 1.0 :)

-Aleksey.

[1] http://central.maven.org/maven2/org/openjdk/jmh/jmh-core/
[2]
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/issues/?jql=project%20in%20(CODETOOLS)%20AND%20component%20in%20(tools)%20AND%20Subcomponent%20in%20(jmh)"