here - Stefan-Marr.de

8
E VA L U AT I O N : P E R F O R M A N C E
The goal of this chapter is to evaluate the performance of the AST-OMOP
and the RoarVM+OMOP, by comparing the OMOP-based and ad hoc implementations
of LRSTM and AmbientTalkST. This assessment is based on the
assumption that application developers already use concurrent programming
based on systems similar to LRSTM or AmbientTalkST. Therefore, this evaluation
needs to show that applications can reach on par performance when
LRSTM and AmbientTalkST are implemented on top of the OMOP compared
to being implemented with ad hoc strategies.
This chapter first details the evaluation methodology and the generalizability
of the results. These results allow conclusions for other bytecode interpreters.
However, they preclude conclusions for high-performance VMs.
Subsequently, the performance comparison of the ad hoc and OMOP-based
implementations of AmbientTalkST and LRSTM shows that the OMOP can be
used to implement concurrent programming concepts efficiently. Currently,
the OMOP provides a sweet spot for implementations that rely on the customization
of state access policies as used in LRSTM. The evaluation further
shows that the overhead of the AST-OMOP is high, while the overhead of the
RoarVM+OMOP is significantly lower. The customization constant optimization
introduces inherent overhead, but offers performance benefits when only
a small number of intercession handlers are customized. Overall, the comparison
of AST-OMOP and RoarVM+OMOP indicates the need of VM support
for the OMOP to obtain performance on par with ad hoc implementations.
201