[Vladimir Marangozov, on NeilS's gc patch] > ... > The overall strategy looks good, but there are some black spots > w.r.t its cost, both in speed and space. Neil reported in private > mail something like 5-10% mem increase, but I doubt that the picture > is so optimistic. My understanding is that these numbers reflect > the behavior of the Linux VMM in terms of effectively used pages. In > terms of absolute, peak requested virtual memory, things are probably > worse than that. We're still unclear on this... Luckily, that's what Open Source is all about: if we have to wait for you (or Neil, or Guido, or anyone else) to do a formal study of the issue, the patch will never go in. Put the code out there and let people try it, and 50 motivated users will run the only 50 tests that really matter: i.e., does their real code suffer or not? If so, a few of them may even figure out why. less-thought-more-eyeballs-ly y'rs - tim
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4