bq. But tons of people on this mailing list do not recommend AggressiveOpts
It's up to you to decide - that is why it's an option. It will enable more aggressive options that will tend to perform better. On the other hand, these more aggressive options and optimizations have a history of being more buggy. Depending on your needs and risk tolerance, you might make a different choice. You probably want to research the specific issues it has been found to cause and whether those issues are important to you or affect the JVM you are using. You also have to keep in mind that probably all of the issues are not known or documented and that updates may introduce new issues. You face some risk like that no matter what though. - Mark On Fri Jan 02 2015 at 8:37:47 AM Shawn Heisey <apa...@elyograg.org> wrote: > On 1/1/2015 6:35 PM, William Bell wrote: > > But tons of people on this mailing list do not recommend AggressiveOpts > > > > Why do you recommend it? > > I haven't done any comparisons with and without it. To call it a > "recommendation" is a little bit strong. I use it, and I am seeing good > results. > > My reading indicates that AggressiveOpts basically enables settings that > are being considered for defaults in a later Java version. If they are > being seriously considered for new defaults, they are probably something > that I want to be using. I have also heard that there are sometimes > bugs with that option, but I have not personally had any problems. > > If you don't want to use that option, feel free to leave it out. I will > update my wiki page with a note about AggressiveOpts. > > Thanks, > Shawn > >
