[HN Gopher] Preview of Microsoft Build of OpenJDK
___________________________________________________________________
Preview of Microsoft Build of OpenJDK
Author : velmu
Score : 93 points
Date : 2021-04-06 15:28 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (devblogs.microsoft.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (devblogs.microsoft.com)
| Null-Set wrote:
| The distinction from other builds:
|
| > Microsoft Build of OpenJDK 11 binaries may contain backported
| fixes and enhancements we deem important to our customers and our
| internal users. Some of these may have not yet been formally
| backported upstream and are clearly signposted in our release
| notes. This allows us to expedite improvements and fixes much
| faster while we proceed to upstream those changes in parallel.
| Updates will be free and available to every Java developer to
| deploy anywhere.
| suyash wrote:
| For those looking for pure open JDK builds :
| https://openjdk.java.net/install/
| Koshkin wrote:
| The salient piece:
|
| Microsoft deploys over 500,000 Java Virtual Machines (JVMs)
| internally - excluding all Azure services and customer workloads
| - with needs that go from back-end microservices to Big Data
| systems, message brokers, event streaming services, and gaming
| servers. More than 140,000 of these JVMs are already based on the
| Microsoft Build of OpenJDK.
| pritambarhate wrote:
| Linked In (owned by MS) is a big user of JVM. Kafka originated
| at Linked In. [1] Similarly many other acquired companies by MS
| may be using JVM. Also many BigData related OSS systems require
| JVM. Most likely MS must be running a few of those too.
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_Kafka
| dukoid wrote:
| Now I am wondering how much of this number is minecraft
| servers... :)
| The_rationalist wrote:
| I have heard that switching from a JDK vendor to another can
| alter runtime performance. It is to be expected as the JVM is a
| C++ codebase, its performance depends on the compiler flags.
|
| Hence I wonder if there is a vendor that has found the optimal
| configuration e.g -03 + x86-v3 (AVX) + LTO + PGO (e.g autofdo) +
| BOLT
| karianna wrote:
| TLDR: This can happen, but is not done much in practice.
|
| Most vendors use pretty similar build toolchains in order to
| maintain platform support baselines. Typically any improvements
| get made at OpenJDK and then filter back down to downstream
| distributions.
|
| One of the things we're looking to do is to add Metadata to the
| release to make the exact toolchain transparent going forward.
| firstSpeaker wrote:
| there are plenty of vendors providing builds of OpenJDK. I am not
| sure how are they different from one another and what
| distinguishing features they could provide. Wishing for a
| comparison matrix!
| brsiegel wrote:
| Azul publishes a decent comparison matrix:
| https://www.azul.com/products/zulu-enterprise/jdk-comparison...
| soapdog wrote:
| I don't know about other vendors but as far as I can tell,
| Microsoft is the only vendor providing an aarch64 build of
| OpenJDK for Windows thus making it available to all those cute
| Windows on ARM machines.
| webreac wrote:
| AFAIK redhat took over the maintenance of java for the
| releases that are not anymore provided by oracle:
| https://developers.redhat.com/products/openjdk/download
|
| I do not know why microsoft dupplicates this effort.
| pritambarhate wrote:
| Most likely because it's of strategic importance to them
| and they don't want to depend on a third party for a
| critical piece of their infrastructure.
| xeeeeeeeeeeenu wrote:
| There are many other OpenJDK vendors:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenJDK#OpenJDK_builds
| ayewo wrote:
| > I do not know why microsoft dupplicates this effort.
|
| Why do you say they are duplicating efforts?
|
| The builds on the RedHat page are for: x86 (32-bit), x64
| (64-bit x86) but any mention of aarch64, which is what
| Microsoft has been working on with Azul Systems, is
| conspicuously missing.
|
| (aarch64 or ARM64 is the 64-bit extension of the ARM
| architecture.)
| jarym wrote:
| Good and welcome progress - eventually I hope there will be
| better interop between .NET and Java platforms.
|
| Meanwhile most Microsoft shops view any non-MS technology as if
| it were a plague.
| The_rationalist wrote:
| The dream would be to make a coreclr IR to graalvm IR similarly
| to sulong (llvm IR to graalvm IR)
| jayd16 wrote:
| Isn't this on the roadmap in some form? I thought I read they
| were consolidating the WinRT interop with the Xamarin Android
| apis for a consistent interop style.
| oaiey wrote:
| They work on language translation concepts. C++ to winrt, C#
| to WinRT, Rust to WinRT,... And also C# to (Android) Java or
| C# to (iOS) Swift/Objective-C.
|
| But that is just interop/language translation beyond stone
| age C ABI like most languages do.
| pulse7 wrote:
| Is this a new try of "Embrace, extend, and extinguish" [1]?
|
| Now that OpenJDK is GPL-ed, they can add anything they want! And
| of course - they will not try to put the changes upstream,
| because this is not "extend" anymore...
|
| [1]
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...
| JoyrexJ9 wrote:
| Hasn't this extend/embrace thing got a little tired now. Are
| people still living 15-20 years in the past?
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| rubin55 wrote:
| Will this enable me to run JetBrains IDEs on Windows on ARM?
| karianna wrote:
| We'd love to see folks try and give both Jetbrains and
| ourselves feedback!
| brunoborges wrote:
| We saw some folks running Minecraft Java Edition on Windows on
| ARM with our JDK 16 EA builds. So... technically, it is
| possible. It will mostly depend on JetBrains' IDEA
| lewurm wrote:
| Issue at JetBrains:
| https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/JBR-2074
| oweiler wrote:
| SDKMAN! already supports the Microsoft Build
|
| sdk install java 11.0.10.9-ms
| adamc wrote:
| This is a good thing. Even though my shop has mostly moved on
| from Java (to Python and other things), we still run plenty of
| software that depends on it.
|
| I wonder how badly Oracle's attempt to monetize Java is going.
| Sindisil wrote:
| Not sure what exactly you mean, but they've open sourced the
| entire JDK, including Flight Recorder and Java mission control.
|
| They're selling support for the JDK to companies that value
| that service.
|
| I'm guessing they're doing OK on that front, since the sorts of
| enterprises that typically buy support are their bread and
| butter.
| JCWasmx86 wrote:
| Is it something special or is it just another OpenJDK-build with
| support?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-04-06 23:01 UTC)