Wed Feb 2 12:22:08 CET 2005
--- "Joe Armstrong (AL/EAB)"
> Speedup = (... above ...) - cycles to do GC
> +/- cycles to handle page faults
> + cycles spent while system was down because it
> crashed because the atom table was filled
> - ...
> + Speedups gained because I can write more
> efficient code.
I started out with looking at the details of your
estimate (is it speedup or cycles?) but I think the
core issue is really another one.
First: I fully support not running out of atoms -- I
hardly would have asked for atom GC if I didn't. I
think it's an implementation flaw to have to worry
about such a thing.
Second: Whether the proper method of managing atoms is
atom GC, per-module atom tables with a new data
representation, or something else, is an engineering
issue. If your formula above indicates success,
implement your proposal and see if it was right.
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
More information about the erlang-questions