From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0901BC74 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 14:37:17 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAANP0p0fAXQImh2dsb2JhbACQKwEBAQgKKZwy X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,308,1199660400"; d="scan'208";a="8780564" Received: from discorde.inria.fr ([192.93.2.38]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 05 Feb 2008 14:33:55 +0100 Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by discorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m15DXrWH019848 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 14:33:54 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ao8CAB70p0fAbSoIZmdsb2JhbACQHg0LCiacMg X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,308,1199660400"; d="scan'208";a="7627099" Received: from einhorn.in-berlin.de ([192.109.42.8]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 05 Feb 2008 14:33:54 +0100 X-Envelope-From: oliver@first.in-berlin.de X-Envelope-To: Received: from einhorn.in-berlin.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by einhorn.in-berlin.de (8.13.6/8.13.6/Debian-1) with ESMTP id m15DXsRo002634 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 14:33:54 +0100 Received: (from www-data@localhost) by einhorn.in-berlin.de (8.13.6/8.13.6/Submit) id m15DXrFr002632 for caml-list@inria.fr; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 14:33:53 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: einhorn.in-berlin.de: www-data set sender to oliver@first.in-berlin.de using -f Received: from dslb-088-073-107-081.pools.arcor-ip.net (dslb-088-073-107-081.pools.arcor-ip.net [88.73.107.81]) by webmail.in-berlin.de (IMP) with HTTP for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 14:33:53 +0100 Message-ID: <1202218433.47a865c1d3619@webmail.in-berlin.de> Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 14:33:53 +0100 From: Oliver Bandel To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Performance-question MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.6 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang_at_IN-Berlin_e.V. on 192.109.42.8 X-Miltered: at discorde with ID 47A865C1.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; bandel:01 in-berlin:01 pointer:01 chunks:01 compactions:01 ths:98 0.01:98 cumulative:98 0.01:98 0.40:98 oliver:01 oliver:01 invert:01 heap:01 heap:01 Hello, I have a concrete (non philosophical) question on the Performance of one of my scripts. The general behaviour: it reads data fast first, then slows down a lot (possibly after about 1/3 of the data; it seems to completely have stopped then), then later speeds up again. Ths script needs nearly complete CPU-time and the system load goes up. Now here some data: ===================================================== Each sample counts as 0.01 seconds. % cumulative self self total time seconds seconds calls s/call s/call name 44.45 163.08 163.08 26627 0.01 0.01 mark_slice 22.31 244.92 81.84 38447 0.00 0.00 sweep_slice 14.40 297.74 52.82 131 0.40 0.61 caml_compact_heap 3.49 310.54 12.80 372416920 0.00 0.00 invert_pointer_at 3.40 323.02 12.48 560604006 0.00 0.00 compact_allocate 3.12 334.45 11.43 9725772 0.00 0.00 caml_fl_allocate 0.92 337.81 3.36 25607 0.00 0.00 caml_add_to_heap ---------------------------------------------------------------------- minor_words: 218494242 promoted_words: 38303811 major_words: 3546606791 minor_collections: 64811 major_collections: 720 heap_words: 1044480 heap_chunks: 17 top_heap_words: 47322112 live_words: 666290 live_blocks: 103159 free_words: 378186 free_blocks: 360 largest_free: 60034 fragments: 4 compactions: 131 ===================================================== For me it looks like a lot of GC-actions, but I'm not sure in that point. What do you think is slowing down here, and how to avoid this behaviour? Ciao, Oliver