Sorry, no.
We wanted a basic bound on the jitter - the application is not one
that creates much (if any) long lived heap.
Having just seen Simon's email on the fact that performGC forces a
major GC - i think that there is some
new mileage here with making the speculative GC's minor ones.
More control needs some more instrumentation of how much mutation is
occurring and ways of estimating
how much of that is short and long lived - I know that past history is
not necessarily a good indicator
of future actions - but visibility of the counters that being kept
would help.
Neil
On 3 Mar 2010, at 00:00, Jason Dusek wrote:
2010/02/28 Neil Davies <[email protected]>:
I've never observed ones that size. I have an application that runs
in 'rate
equivalent real-time' (i.e. there may be some jitter in the exact
time of
events but it does not accumulate). It does have some visibility of
likely
time of future events and uses that to perform some speculative
garbage
collection.
Do you have information on how it behaves without speculative
GC?
--
Jason Dusek
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
