# What Go Taught Us About Java Garbage Collection

DevFeed: [What Go Taught Us About Java Garbage Collection](<https://devfeed.tech/articles/what-go-taught-us-about-java-garbage-collection-19424.md>)

Original publisher: [Read original article](<https://www.codenameone.com/blog/parparvm-gc-small-heaps/>)

Author: Shai Almog

Published: 2026-09-12T00:00:00Z

Content type: opinion

Language: en

Sources: [CodeName One](<https://devfeed.tech/sources/codename-one.md>)

Topics: [Go Language](<https://devfeed.tech/topics/go-language.md>), [Java](<https://devfeed.tech/topics/java.md>), [benchmarking](<https://devfeed.tech/topics/benchmarking.md>)

Tags: [comparison](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/comparison.md>), [garbage-collection](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/garbage-collection.md>), [go](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/go.md>), [java](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/java.md>), [latency](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/latency.md>), [memory](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/memory.md>), [performance](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/performance.md>)

## AI overview

A comparison between ParparVM and Go prompts an investigation into Java garbage-collection pacing, allocation thresholds, and memory use. Lowering ParparVM's allocation threshold reduced measured process resident memory from 98 MB to 38 MB, while throughput and p99 latency changed little in the reported test.

## Source excerpt

A Go performance comparison led us from stack allocation to GC pacing, parallel marking, and image caches. ParparVM can explore those choices while keeping ordinary Java APIs.