[erlang-questions] pid representation in external term format

[Michael Truog]

On 09/11/2013 09:58 AM, Serge Aleynikov wrote:
> Presently the PID representation in external term format is limited to the following:
>
> http://www.erlang.org/doc/apps/erts/erl_ext_dist.html#id87011
>
> ./erts/emulator/beam/erl_node_container_utils.h:#define ERTS_MAX_PID_NUMBER           ((1 << _PID_NUM_SIZE) - 1)
> ./erts/emulator/beam/erl_term.h:#define _PID_NUM_SIZE                 15
>
> ID is limited to 15 bits
> Serial is limited to 3 bits
>
> So in total a PID consists of 18 bits, and therefore it seems that the number of pids on any remote node cannot exceed 2^18 (262144).  While it may seem like a large number, when creating a node in other languages that implement Erlang distributed transport (e.g. C/C#/Java) and create/destroy mailboxes, the local pid counter used to create unique Pids can easily go over that limit.  The work-around is to cache freed local pids and resurrect them when pid counter wraps around 2^18 boundary.
>
> This brings the question of whether that limitation is still necessary in the current version of distribution.  Internally Pids use a wider representation (is it 28 bits?), so aside for supporting older versions of beam (which can be worked around through flags in distributed transport) is there any valid reason not to increase the pid maximum numbering limit?
>
> BTW, as a side note, how is the same problem addressed in the beam when the pid ID counter reaches that limit? Does it make it possible that a newly assigned Pid becomes non-unique? (I.e. if some entity still maintains a reference to an old Pid that died, and later after the pid ID counter wrapped around, a new Pid was assigned the same Pid ID number of a previously dead Pid, then the entity that had the reference to the old Pid with the same ID, could send a message to it that would not be valid for the new Pid.)
>
> Serge
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions@REDACTED
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Why wouldn't the Erlang VM be changed to use 4 bits for the Serial and 4 bits for the Id, so that the sizes match what the External Term Format allows?  Is this change on the Erlang VM roadmap?


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20130912/7e32fe56/attachment.htm>