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 OAA22160; Tue, 27 Jul 2004 14:04:49 +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 OAA22117 for ; Tue, 27 Jul 2004 14:04:48 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mproxy.gmail.com (rproxy.gmail.com [64.233.170.207]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i6RC4lSH032605 for ; Tue, 27 Jul 2004 14:04:47 +0200 Received: by mproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 79so140219rnk for ; Tue, 27 Jul 2004 05:04:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.38.89.38 with SMTP id m38mr596854rnb; Tue, 27 Jul 2004 05:04:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <891bd33904072705044e31a2b6@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 08:04:46 -0400 From: Yaron Minsky Reply-To: yminsky@cs.cornell.edu To: Xavier Leroy Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: Size limitation on input_value Cc: Caml Mailing List In-Reply-To: <20040727074119.GB18770@yquem.inria.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <891bd33904072212415292635c@mail.gmail.com> <891bd33904072609484169f951@mail.gmail.com> <20040726171205.GD6618@yquem.inria.fr> <891bd33904072611144e47e57e@mail.gmail.com> <20040727074119.GB18770@yquem.inria.fr> X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 410644DF.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; yaron:01 minsky:01 yminsky:01 caml-list:01 yaron:01 2004:99 buffer:01 ocaml:01 caml:01 caml:01 blocking:01 toplevel:01 toplevel:01 0200,:01 maximal:02 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk My apologies. I only realized that we'd added the -vmthread flag after you pointed out that you couldn't reproduce the problem. Thanks, Yaron On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 09:41:19 +0200, Xavier Leroy wrote: > > Interesting. I can't replicate this on a stock ocaml toplevel. It > > does occur, however, on a toplevel with vmthreads compiled in. > > Ah, you should have said that earlier. With vmthreads, input_value > and output_value go through an intermediate buffer which is a Caml string > (this is required because vmthreads must avoid blocking I/O system > calls, hence all I/O must be performed at the Caml level). So, the > size of the data written by output_value or read by input_value is > limited by the maximal length of a Caml string. > > This limitation of vmthreads isn't new in 3.08, it's been present from > the beginning. > > - Xavier Leroy > ------------------- 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