[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>
> Did you try running it with HEAD? There were small GC-stats "cleanups"
> committed there that are not in 1.8, so it may be worth trying.
Ah yes, it's better there. What bit is the operative fix? Both the
per-freelist min_yield adjust and the counting in
scm_i_sweep_all_segments look likely. (Though it still all looks
complicated, and sprayed around a dozen functions :-(
> Also, did you try fiddling with the `GUILE_MIN_YIELD_{1,2}' variables?
No. I agree with the yield fractions at the point they're applied, I
just think the supposed collected cells (ie. unused space) in the
calculation is too small, making the calculation think the heap should
be grown, when in fact there's plenty of heap already.
_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel
