From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AFD2BC57 for ; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 13:11:40 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AngCACIn80zRVdc0kGdsb2JhbACUfI15CBYBAQEJCQwHEQMfqEKLfAEFjUsBBIVH X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.59,275,1288566000"; d="scan'208";a="89597500" Received: from mail-ew0-f52.google.com ([209.85.215.52]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 29 Nov 2010 13:11:40 +0100 Received: by ewy23 with SMTP id 23so1689240ewy.39 for ; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 04:11:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:content-type:mime-version :subject:from:in-reply-to:date:content-transfer-encoding:message-id :references:to:x-mailer; bh=Al2bKJprmok+Xr9m+RbF736OyGb83fw9vfxSeTNTfcs=; b=RFCC8KGSMtRqGtQ5GTaTBcDuv6aXjLTxSKwoOZ3gA9903AcEq/vcMCGel7gequYjDu vU364rvyalTndMB3BbZo4KcPUMGV0v/q2mqZJzxTtKzALhW+Uzmd+HFIamullWNqT+Ul Qvdx/ri4LeuolkPHZ6QJJtSksV+WZiOeaCHLs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; b=NxH3sBpTHU0I1dJgCQOSbAbZ4CU6JDZ2Guatj0Ed29zKUlEgEiw56NN1lOpLnmum1L FIY7oLEKb2yx/8jXzQbUShv4bNVuKNqy2hgGZKb++2MAfsa14fyz+RApZcFOfOZMF4ek ikcOY5BT4Wy6oNVptq1tCVT7fftcf6IFW2t1A= Received: by 10.213.17.13 with SMTP id q13mr6609532eba.65.1291032699734; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 04:11:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from bespin.kosmos.all (ip-95-223-170-32.unitymediagroup.de [95.223.170.32]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id v51sm5078363eeh.16.2010.11.29.04.11.38 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 29 Nov 2010 04:11:39 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml GC [was Is OCaml fast?] From: Benedikt Meurer In-Reply-To: <08ef01cb8f54$d4bf1af0$7e3d50d0$@com> Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 13:11:37 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <1290434674.16005.354.camel@thinkpad> <582306206.731582.1290438133628.JavaMail.root@zmbs4.inria.fr> <20101122203334.7adc5ee6@deb0> <20101127221121.0920db65@ordinaves.concept-micro.com> <4CF25878.4060202@univ-savoie.fr> <08df01cb8f34$299d5800$7cd80800$@com> <208D27C6-A2CD-4383-8667-F4988301D265@googlemail.com> <08ef01cb8f54$d4bf1af0$7e3d50d0$@com> To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081) X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 ocaml:01 generational:01 compaction:01 generational:01 cheers:01 haskell:01 wiki:01 wrote:01 heap:01 caml-list:01 minor:01 ghc:01 ghc:01 reuse:01 On Nov 29, 2010, at 00:34 , Jon Harrop wrote: > I see. Yes, that sounds like a great idea. How well does Immix cope = with > high allocation rates of short-lived objects? Been a while since I = read the > Immix paper... In theory this should be handled more efficiently compared to a = generational collector (given an appropriate evacuation heuristic), = since there is less copying and short-lived objects tend to reuse the = "hot" memory of objects that died previously (similar to the minor heap = now), while survivers benefit from better compaction (without the need = for a seperate mark-compact phase as implemented in the current major = GC). The timings for Java are impressive, but the allocation rates in Java = tend to be different from those typically found in functional programs. = There was also a GSoC project to implement Immix for GHC [1], but they = seem to have used Immix in a generational setting, with mixed results = (my knowledge of the GHC GC is limited).=20 > Cheers, > Jon. greets, Benedikt [1] = http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/Commentary/Rts/Storage/GC/Immix=