[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