Untimely garbage collection

Shawn Pearce <>
Mon Jul 15 02:00:34 CEST 2002

I know this isn't my problem.  If I got the 30+ binaries, each
over 128K apiece back in my shell, it'd choke.

I'd dreged through most of the processes in my Erlang node, it
doesn't look like they are stuck in anybody's message queue

I had figured my strategy would work well, as it had been
at one point about two weeks ago.  I also checked most of
the Erts source code, and in R8B-1 the binary should
get collected and its refc updated immediately during
a call to erlang:garbage_collect().

I recently concluded about two days ago that I may not
have all of the cases worked out on interaction between
my background pthread and Erts.  I think I am going to
revisit them and see what might be missing.

As an intersting side note, the refc's are messed up
unless I use fprintf(stderr, "test!\r\n") in my
driver.  That causes the refc's to be correct.  Cute.
Clearly something is wrong.

And I think Sean Hinde is right, what I am trying to
do should just work, providing my thread communication is

Sean Hinde <> scrawled:
> > Suddenly this has stopped working.  My C drivers are
> > seizing when they run out of binaries, and all of the
> > binaries have a refc of 3:  one for the driver that
> > "owns" the binary, and one for each gen_server process.
> I had this problem once when developing my (now abandoned - mnesia got even
> better :) ) SQL driver. The solution turned out to be sipmly that I was
> testing from the shell which also retained the binaries in it's result
> history!
> Otherwise binaries got GC'd very quickly and I could rely on the refc no
> problem.


Why do I like Perl?  Because ``in accordance with Unix tradition Perl
gives you enough rope to hang yourself with.''

Why do I dislike Java? Because ``the class ROPE that should contain the
method HANG to do the hanging doesn't exist because there is too much
'security' built into the base language.''

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list