Am Montag, den 28.12.2009, 19:05 +0100 schrieb Xavier Leroy:
> Gerd Stolpmann wrote:
>
> > It works with all types:
> >
> > https://godirepo.camlcity.org/svn/lib-ocamlnet2/trunk/code/src/netsys/netsys_mem.mli
> >
> > look for init_value. It's non-released code yet.
> >
> > However, there are s
Gerd Stolpmann wrote:
> It works with all types:
>
> https://godirepo.camlcity.org/svn/lib-ocamlnet2/trunk/code/src/netsys/netsys_mem.mli
>
> look for init_value. It's non-released code yet.
>
> However, there are some problems: Values outside the heap do not support
> the polymorphic compariso
On 28 Dec 2009, at 12:28, Gerd Stolpmann wrote:
> However, there are some problems: Values outside the heap do not support
> the polymorphic comparison and hash functions. That's a hard limitation,
> e.g. you cannot even compare two strings, or build a hash table with
> strings as keys. That limit
Am Sonntag, den 27.12.2009, 13:45 +0100 schrieb Goswin von Brederlow:
> Jon Harrop writes:
>
> > On Thursday 24 December 2009 13:19:52 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> >> Jon Harrop writes:
> >> > No, in OCaml I fork every child. That is the only transparent way to give
> >> > the child a coherent
On Sunday 27 December 2009 12:45:53 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> There is one implementation: http://www.algo-prog.info/ocmc/web/
> But as said maybe not a very good one.
>
> I tried implementing parallel threads under the original GC by forking
> multiple instances of the same program and using a
Jon Harrop writes:
> On Thursday 24 December 2009 13:19:52 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Jon Harrop writes:
>> > No, in OCaml I fork every child. That is the only transparent way to give
>> > the child a coherent view of the heap but it is extremely slow (~1ms):
>>
>> So if you add a (sleep 60)
On Thursday 24 December 2009 13:19:52 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Jon Harrop writes:
> > No, in OCaml I fork every child. That is the only transparent way to give
> > the child a coherent view of the heap but it is extremely slow (~1ms):
>
> So if you add a (sleep 60) to the ocaml code then ocam
On Thursday 24 December 2009 12:58:18 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Jon Harrop writes:
> > On Tuesday 22 December 2009 18:02:32 Edgar Friendly wrote:
> >> On 12/22/2009 01:12 PM, Jon Harrop wrote:
> >> > On Tuesday 22 December 2009 13:09:27 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> >> >> The advantage with oc
Jon Harrop writes:
> On Tuesday 22 December 2009 13:09:27 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Jon Harrop writes:
>> > 1. The array "a" is just an ordinary array of any type of values on the
>> > shared heap in F# but, for generality in OCaml, this must be both the
>> > underlying ordinary data and a
Jon Harrop writes:
> On Tuesday 22 December 2009 18:02:32 Edgar Friendly wrote:
>> On 12/22/2009 01:12 PM, Jon Harrop wrote:
>> > On Tuesday 22 December 2009 13:09:27 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> >> The advantage with ocaml though is that you never have pointers into a
>> >> structure. Makes th
On Tuesday 22 December 2009 18:02:32 Edgar Friendly wrote:
> On 12/22/2009 01:12 PM, Jon Harrop wrote:
> > On Tuesday 22 December 2009 13:09:27 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> >> The advantage with ocaml though is that you never have pointers into a
> >> structure. Makes thinks a lot simpler for the
On 12/22/2009 01:12 PM, Jon Harrop wrote:
On Tuesday 22 December 2009 13:09:27 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
The advantage with ocaml though is that you never have pointers into a
structure. Makes thinks a lot simpler for the GC and avoids large
overheads in memory.
I don't understand w
On Tuesday 22 December 2009 13:09:27 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Jon Harrop writes:
> > 1. The array "a" is just an ordinary array of any type of values on the
> > shared heap in F# but, for generality in OCaml, this must be both the
> > underlying ordinary data and a manually-managed shared big
Jon Harrop writes:
> Cilk pioneered wait-free work-stealing task deques and Microsoft's Task
> Parallel Library (which will be part of .NET 4 in March 2010) copied the
> idea. You have a separate deque of tasks for each core. A core tries to pop a
> task off its deque. If there are no tasks on
Hi,
> I am beginning using Ocsigen, for a growing web project:
> Is multicore support useless for scaling on Ocsigen?
Categorically, yes. In fact, I would say that the model used by Ocsigen
is close to being optimal performance-wise as far as web applications are
concerned. The Ocsigen server a
On Monday 21 December 2009 14:19:36 Mihamina Rakotomandimby wrote:
> Ok, so for the beginner I am (must I ask on the beginners ML?): is
> multicore support just useless or not?
I have found a great many uses for multicores but you need a decent foundation
to make effective use of it.
--
Dr Jon
Mihamina,
> Ok, so for the beginner I am (must I ask on the beginners ML?): is
> multicore support just useless or not?
That *entirely* depends on what you want to do. If, for example, you
have to do a large calculation that is limited by memory and not by CPU,
or, if you have an application th
Ok, so for the beginner I am (must I ask on the beginners ML?): is
multicore support just useless or not?
I am beginning using Ocsigen, for a growing web project:
Is multicore support useless for scaling on Ocsigen?
X-post to Ocsigen ML.
--
Architecte Informatique chez Blueline/Gulfsat:
18 matches
Mail list logo
