On Monday, 14 September 2015 at 20:34:03 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
I'm not sure why it wouldn't be suitable for the typical use
case. It's quite performant. It would still not be suitable for
many games and environments that can't afford to stop the world
for more than a few milliseconds, but it brings the stop the
world time down considerably, making the GC more suitable for
more environments than it would be now, and I'm not aware of
any serious downsides to it on a *nix system.
For me concurrent gc implies interactive applications or
webservices that are memory constrained/diskless. You cannot
prevent triggering actions that writes all over memory during
collection without taking special care, like avoiding RC. A fork
kan potentially double memory consumption. Gc by itself uses ~2x
memory, with fork you have to plan for 3-4x.
In the cloud you pay for extra RAM. So configuring the app to a
fixed sized memory heap that matches the instance RAM capacity is
useful. With fork you just have to play it safe and halve the
heap size. So more collections and less utilized RAM per dollar
with fork.
Only testing will show the effect, but it does not sound
promising for my use cases.
- Re:... ponce via Digitalmars-d-learn
- Re:... Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d-learn
- Re:... Prudence via Digitalmars-d-learn
- Re:... Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-learn
- Re:... Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-learn
- Re:... Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d-learn
- Re:... Laeeth Isharc via Digitalmars-d-learn
- Re:... Laeeth Isharc via Digitalmars-d-learn
- Re:... Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d-learn
- Re:... Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-learn
- Re:... Ola Fosheim Grostad via Digitalmars-d-learn
- Re:... Laeeth Isharc via Digitalmars-d-learn
- Re: shared a... Kagamin via Digitalmars-d-learn
- Re: shared array? Kagamin via Digitalmars-d-learn