From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE7BF7FA4D for ; Tue, 29 Jul 2014 06:26:07 +0200 (CEST) Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of gabriel.scherer@gmail.com) identity=pra; client-ip=209.85.220.169; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="gabriel.scherer@gmail.com"; x-sender="gabriel.scherer@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of gabriel.scherer@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.169 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=209.85.220.169; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="gabriel.scherer@gmail.com"; x-sender="gabriel.scherer@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@mail-vc0-f169.google.com) identity=helo; client-ip=209.85.220.169; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="gabriel.scherer@gmail.com"; x-sender="postmaster@mail-vc0-f169.google.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AjcBADgh11PRVdypm2dsb2JhbABZg2BXBIJ0sDCYZIdLAYENCBYQAQEBAQEGCwsJFCmEBAEBBBIRHQEbEgsBAwwGBQsNAgIJHQICIQEBEQEFAQoSBhMIChCICwEDEQ2bIWqLKYFygxCKagoZJwMKZIYvEQEFDoEeiFODIIItB4J5gVEFhHMFlE+CBYFSjFeEMRgphHw7Lw X-IPAS-Result: AjcBADgh11PRVdypm2dsb2JhbABZg2BXBIJ0sDCYZIdLAYENCBYQAQEBAQEGCwsJFCmEBAEBBBIRHQEbEgsBAwwGBQsNAgIJHQICIQEBEQEFAQoSBhMIChCICwEDEQ2bIWqLKYFygxCKagoZJwMKZIYvEQEFDoEeiFODIIItB4J5gVEFhHMFlE+CBYFSjFeEMRgphHw7Lw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.01,754,1400018400"; d="scan'208";a="73131168" Received: from mail-vc0-f169.google.com ([209.85.220.169]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 29 Jul 2014 06:26:07 +0200 Received: by mail-vc0-f169.google.com with SMTP id le20so4002789vcb.0 for ; Mon, 28 Jul 2014 21:26:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=CfFN6i2aFKhhcIT9DfBb0vAVyToRK1D667+EvPQuTeU=; b=FyTQhiSGCR0kJOz53ajezw5C35PIj8CJIiP93eF5s6X9qupgFshBb5I4X72MP6XfYA SgQYwP1JYuI+EsSw7R+GpcamhoYu28MbvXeyah9DlhLZ5TK5pKlA9/v92Xf25IRrbKhm lWZ/kBbJpJa6QRT3Z+IQGGr2xfjtG94AO7wspkTAYTXKH0HldtFF+ssbldcFfF+G02wB +8q5jmOfsOD8+0xffjoUo4J4hH3/8EuxHzPB1j5ZyZ6jqxSTb6jCsVlI+qyLSXqjkkWw b12vAvpZiuUaW4itFCcVV4F4z2kXc9zpDN9/BQuDQk2dxxz/rNZaKotN8yVAg9dPqREj WjFA== X-Received: by 10.52.52.136 with SMTP id t8mr1300884vdo.21.1406607965612; Mon, 28 Jul 2014 21:26:05 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.58.112.73 with HTTP; Mon, 28 Jul 2014 21:25:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <21456.19915.45180.915211@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <20140728112431.GC26816@frosties> From: Gabriel Scherer Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2014 06:25:25 +0200 Message-ID: To: Raoul Duke Cc: Goswin von Brederlow , OCaml Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Re: [Caml-list] concurrent gc? This is not a bug, at best a feature request (of the kind "we've already talked about plenty of times and nobody stepped forward to do actual work to demonstrate usefulness"). You can optimize your data representation this or that way, and they will work better or this or that workflow. Do you have practical experience with OCaml programs with unacceptable pauses, or is this discussion just premature GC optimization? Having a concrete example to work with could be interesting. On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 7:34 PM, Raoul Duke wrote: >>> There are also other tricks such as changing the tag of a block to avoid >>> scanning, but I wouldn't advise to use it unless you really know what you >>> are doing... >> That is actualy something that should be fixed in the compiler. There >> are some special cases that use special tags, e.g. a record only >> containing floats will be tagges as float array. But any record that >> contains no pointers should be tagged so it isn't needlessly scanned. >> Afaik that doesn't happen yet. > > anybody who understands those words willing to open a bug report on it? ;-) > > -- > Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management and archives: > https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list > Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners > Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs