From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id NAA00047; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:58:48 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA22478 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:58:47 +0200 (MET DST) X-SPAM-Warning: Sending machine is listed in blackholes.five-ten-sg.com Received: from postfix3-2.free.fr (postfix3-2.free.fr [213.228.0.169]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i6JBwkSH015658 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:58:46 +0200 Received: from univ-savoie.fr (grenoble-1-62-147-73-136.dial.proxad.net [62.147.73.136]) by postfix3-2.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67E8BC73C; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:58:44 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <40FC0BEF.4080909@univ-savoie.fr> Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:59:11 -0400 From: Christophe Raffalli User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040115 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: caml-list Subject: [Caml-list] GC and caml_oldify_local_roots taking too much time X-Enigmail-Version: 0.83.3.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 40FBB776.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; raffalli:01 raffalli:01 univ-savoie:01 oldify:01 slower:01 bounded:01 oldify:01 savoie:01 chablais:01 73376:01 univ-savoie:01 lama:01 enigmail:01 mutt:01 christophe:01 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk I have a program (doing some shape optimisation) that runs slowler and slower. I did some profiling using grpof (and -pg option) and get the following result: - the memory usage does not grow (stays bounded and reach very fast its maximum) - The number of GC cycles and compactions per time unit stays constant (actually there is quite a lot of compaction (very approximatively 1 per minute). - The function caml_oldify_local_roots is bellow 2% on a 5 minutes run but arround 50% on a 30 minutes run and prbably much more on a ten hour runs, but did not have the time to let the program run 10 hours with -pg (it will take 10 hours :-). - All other GC functions are quite low in the profile. What could cause the increase of time spent in caml_oldify_local_roots ? And what is this function in the first place ? Thanks in advance for any hint. -- Christophe Raffalli Université de Savoie Batiment Le Chablais, bureau 21 73376 Le Bourget-du-Lac Cedex tél: (33) 4 79 75 81 03 fax: (33) 4 79 75 87 42 mail: Christophe.Raffalli@univ-savoie.fr www: http://www.lama.univ-savoie.fr/~RAFFALLI --------------------------------------------- IMPORTANT: this mail is signed using PGP/MIME At least Enigmail/Mozilla, mutt or evolution can check this signature --------------------------------------------- ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners