Thu Sep 2 19:58:23 CEST 1999
On Thu, Sep 02, 1999 at 07:20:41AM -0700, David Brown wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, 2 Sep 1999 11:22:52 +0200 (CEST), Klacke <klacke@REDACTED> said:
> > David Gould writes:
> >> I might be interested in working on this. I am curious to know what has
> >> prevented this in the past,
> > It's a bit hard, to make the gc non blocking ggc.c needs to rewritten
> > into a reentrant collector. This is a bit hard and it also makes
> > the collector a bit slower unless some real clever tricks are
> > applied.
> > ...
> I found a bunch of good papers on garbage collection (realtime as
> well) on <ftp://ftp.cs.utexas.edu/pub/garbage/>. One of the papers
This is Paul Wilsons group at U Texas, a great resource for memory management
information. I have read a number of their papers but not specifically the
realtime GC one. But I will.
> discusses a real-time garbage collector that only needs to coordinate
> with the "mutators" when the mutate memory. We have a nice advantage
> here that there isn't much mutation going on outside of making new
> Their collector is single threaded, and single heaped. Moving to this
> model might help with efficiency, since we could avoid the copy when
> sending local messages. The collector just needs to be run
> periodically (easy with an interpreter) and only needs to be informed
> about mutations. It also eliminates issues with allocation in a
> process whose GC would be running.
> I'll look around and figure out which article it actually is that
> talks about it.
David Gould dg@REDACTED 510.628.3783 or 510.305.9468
Informix Software 300 Lakeside Drive Oakland, CA 94612
You will cooperate with Microsoft, for the good of Microsoft
and for your own survival. -- Navindra Umanee
More information about the erlang-questions