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 concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2D52BC69 for ; Sun, 5 Aug 2007 18:07:28 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp6-g19.free.fr (smtp6-g19.free.fr [212.27.42.36]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l75G7SZx007961 for ; Sun, 5 Aug 2007 18:07:28 +0200 Received: from smtp6-g19.free.fr (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp6-g19.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 604FFB81A1; Sun, 5 Aug 2007 18:07:28 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.1.2] (che78-2-82-237-71-191.fbx.proxad.net [82.237.71.191]) by smtp6-g19.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FE1C2AF5; Sun, 5 Aug 2007 18:07:28 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <46B5F5BF.2060209@inria.fr> Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2007 18:07:27 +0200 From: Xavier Leroy User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Till Varoquaux Cc: Jon Harrop , caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Does the gc avoid collecting arrays of ints References: <9d3ec8300707231035i5a218c16lb1bb1c11cac23e6d@mail.gmail.com> <200707232123.52470.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <9d3ec8300707240323u415c7ee4mec317a5cbe54e50e@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <9d3ec8300707240323u415c7ee4mec317a5cbe54e50e@mail.gmail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.91.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 46B5F5C0.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; arrays:01 ocaml:01 incremental:01 incremental:01 ints:01 caml-list:01 minor:01 minor:01 pauses:05 xavier:06 xavier:06 inria:06 leroy:07 leroy:07 performed:09 For the record: > I thought OCaml did not have an incremental GC, and that minor and > major collections were both atomic. The major collector is incremental: a slice of major GC is performed at every minor GC. If it weren't the case, you'd see big pauses at major GC time. - Xavier Leroy