Re: GC performance - GC fragility
- From: Micha Nelissen <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2008 21:34:20 +0100
Andre Kaufmann wrote:
Also I don't think that the native heap has a much better cache
locality. Think of a native heap which has
1000 entries of the type:
[60 bytes free] [40 bytes allocated] [60 bytes free] [40 bytes.....]
{ it's called heap fragmentation }
What will happen if the applications now wants to allocate 80 bytes ?
Every entry has to be checked and touched. Not quite local (for this
example).
What a load of nonsense. Why must a heap have this kind of structure? It
doesn't. E.g. just read the top part of FastMM source code. Please try
to have at least a bit of clue about a subject before drawing any
conclusions on it.
Micha
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: GC performance - GC fragility
- From: Andre Kaufmann
- Re: GC performance - GC fragility
- References:
- GC performance - GC fragility
- From: Eric Grange
- Re: GC performance - GC fragility
- From: Atmapuri
- Re: GC performance - GC fragility
- From: Andre Kaufmann
- GC performance - GC fragility
- Prev by Date: Re: Is that possible to emulate low speed network connection under highspeed network environment
- Next by Date: Re: A funny yet crazy extreme test on Delphi 7 compiler
- Previous by thread: Re: GC performance - GC fragility
- Next by thread: Re: GC performance - GC fragility
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|