TheLazy.Dev
Portfolio GitHub

Blog

go |kotlin |performance

"Hello World" performance comparison between GraalVM and Go

theodesp

Theofanis Despoudis

Posted on December 1, 2019

"Hello World" performance comparison between GraalVM and Go

Go is an established language with a lots of production exposure. Go is infamous for creating small application footprint and fast performance.

As for GraalVM, taken from their Website:

GraalVM is a universal virtual machine for running applications written in JavaScript, Python, Ruby, R, JVM-based languages like Java, Scala, Groovy, Kotlin, Clojure, and LLVM-based languages such as C and C++.

Which means that it combines the JVM ecosystem with the small footprint and performance of native apps. It looks very promising so far.

In this tutorial I wanted to check really quick what is their "Hello World" performance characteristics just to see how the compare. I may be doing more experiments with different apps to explore more about it.

The Program

I've used standard hello world programs for both Kotlin and Go:

package main

import "fmt"

func main() {
    fmt.Println("hello world")
}
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode 
package hello

fun main(args: Array<String>) : Unit {
    println("Hello world")
}
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

I've used the following versions for Go and GraalVM native-image utility:

$ go version      
go version go1.12.9 darwin/amd64
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode 
āžœ $GRAALVM_HOME/bin/native-image --version 
GraalVM Version 19.3.0 CE
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

I run the examples in this following system:

  Model Name:   MacBook Pro
  Model Identifier: MacBookPro12,1
  Processor Name:   Intel Core i5
  Processor Speed:  2.9 GHz
  Number of Processors: 1
  Total Number of Cores:    2
  L2 Cache (per Core):  256 KB
  L3 Cache: 3 MB
  Hyper-Threading Technology:   Enabled
  Memory:   16 GB
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

The Results

First I compiled the Go executable:

$ go build main.go
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

Disk usage reports only 2mb! Thats great:

$ du -h  main                    
2.0M    main
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

Time usage via both time and gnu-time commands:

$ gtime -v ./main
hello world
        Command being timed: "./main"
        User time (seconds): 0.00
        System time (seconds): 0.00
        Percent of CPU this job got: 66%
        Elapsed (wall clock) time (h:mm:ss or m:ss): 0:00.00
        Average shared text size (kbytes): 0
        Average unshared data size (kbytes): 0
        Average stack size (kbytes): 0
        Average total size (kbytes): 0
        Maximum resident set size (kbytes): 1960
        Average resident set size (kbytes): 0
        Major (requiring I/O) page faults: 0
        Minor (reclaiming a frame) page faults: 615
        Voluntary context switches: 1
        Involuntary context switches: 75
        Swaps: 0
        File system inputs: 0
        File system outputs: 0
        Socket messages sent: 0
        Socket messages received: 0
        Signals delivered: 0
        Page size (bytes): 4096
        Exit status: 0


$ time ./main          
hello world
./main  0.00s user 0.00s system 60% cpu 0.010 total
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

Next I compiled the Kotlin example:

I run maven install typically and then the native-image tool:

mvn clean install

$GRAALVM_HOME/bin/native-image -cp ./target/mixed-code-hello-world-1.0-SNAPSHOT.jar -H:Name=helloworld -H:Class=hello.JavaHello -H:+ReportUnsupportedElementsAtRuntime --allow-incomplete-classpath
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

Disk usage reports 2.8mb! Not bad:

$ du -h ./helloworld 
2.8M    ./helloworld
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

Time usage via both time and gnu-time commands:

$ gtime -v ./helloworld
Hello world
        Command being timed: "./helloworld"
        User time (seconds): 0.00
        System time (seconds): 0.00
        Percent of CPU this job got: 57%
        Elapsed (wall clock) time (h:mm:ss or m:ss): 0:00.00
        Average shared text size (kbytes): 0
        Average unshared data size (kbytes): 0
        Average stack size (kbytes): 0
        Average total size (kbytes): 0
        Maximum resident set size (kbytes): 2072
        Average resident set size (kbytes): 0
        Major (requiring I/O) page faults: 0
        Minor (reclaiming a frame) page faults: 657
        Voluntary context switches: 0
        Involuntary context switches: 11
        Swaps: 0
        File system inputs: 0
        File system outputs: 0
        Socket messages sent: 0
        Socket messages received: 0
        Signals delivered: 0
        Page size (bytes): 4096
        Exit status: 0


$ time ./helloworld
Hello world
./helloworld  0.00s user 0.00s system 56% cpu 0.006 total
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

Looking at the results, they almost look comparable but of course this is just a simplified example and does not show a lot of info. I will certainly explore more of the examples given by the GraalVM team.

Let me know what you think.

šŸ’– šŸ’Ŗ šŸ™… šŸš©
theodesp
Theofanis Despoudis

Posted on December 1, 2019

Join Our Newsletter. No Spam, Only the good stuff.

Sign up to receive the latest update from our blog.

Related

"Hello World" performance comparison between GraalVM and Go
go "Hello World" performance comparison between GraalVM and Go

December 1, 2019