There is the sgc collector and there is the --enable-backtrace option to
the 3m (default) collector. They can require some work to use, tho. They
give you more information from dump-memory-stats, I believe (not sure
exactly the status of sgc, tho).
Do you find tactical (collect-garbage) calls to a
Makes sense.
So -- correct me if I'm wrong ;-) -- my main choices are to use a Custodian
to impose a hard memory limit, and/or throw in tactical
(collect-garbage)'s to help keep usage down.
In terms of profiling where the memory is going, are there any sharper
tools than (current-memory-in-use)?
Thanks Robby
Can the limit be imposed programmatically, for use from the command-line?
Thanks
Dan
On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 9:13 AM, Robby Findler
wrote:
> current-memory-use is counting all of DrRacket's memory and the user
> program memory. The limit, however, includes only the user program'
Yes. DrRacket does it. You'd have to use lower-level operations, tho
(setting up a custodian with a limit before starting the program you want
limited).
Robby
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 4:22 PM, Daniel Prager wrote:
> Thanks Robby
>
> Can the limit be imposed programmatically, for use from the com
current-memory-use is counting all of DrRacket's memory and the user
program memory. The limit, however, includes only the user program's memory.
Robby
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 4:05 PM, Daniel Prager wrote:
> Apropos:
>
> I was wondering why I couldn't limit memory in a Racket program directly
>
Apropos:
I was wondering why I couldn't limit memory in a Racket program directly --
for running from the command-line -- as distinct from in Dr Racket, but the
following transcript shed doubts on Dr Racket:
Welcome to DrRacket, version 5.3.6 [3m].
Language: racket; memory limit: *256 MB*.
> (/
Is there a good reference to measure and understand Racket memory use?
I'm doing a run of scribble and memory use is peaking at over 1 Gb.
I expect that I will be able to make modifications to limit use if I can
get some informative measurements.
Thanks
Dan
--
*Daniel Prager*
Agile/Lean Coac
Nothing comes to mind.
If you know where the runtime is supposed to start you might try adding
printfs in a few places that print out current-process-milliseconds (put a
printf right before the call to profile-thunk too) and see if you can kind
of hone in on something. You might find something sur
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 5:22 PM, Robby Findler
wrote:
> Is it possible that the time is being spent in the expander or in other
> C-based code that would be hidden from the profiler?
I don't know quite what C-based code we might be touching, but I do
know that our parser down to a racket/base pro
Is it possible that the time is being spent in the expander or in other
C-based code that would be hidden from the profiler?
Robby
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Joe Gibbs Politz wrote:
> We're trying to profile some slow running programs in a #lang, and
> having some trouble getting believa
We're trying to profile some slow running programs in a #lang, and
having some trouble getting believable results from the profiler. In
particular, it claims that most (e.g. 60-80%) of the time is spent in
/usr/lib/racket/collects/profile/main.rkt:29:2
We've tried on up to 15-20 second runs of p
Well, here's an example of it working. I don't know what to suggest
but to ask if you could make a small program that illustrates it not
working and maybe we can go from there to understand why you're seeing
what you're seeing.
#lang racket
(require profile)
(define h (make-hash))
(profile
(let
Not unless that's default behavior.
-Ian
- Original Message -
From: "Robby Findler"
To: "J. Ian Johnson"
Cc: "users"
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2012 2:08:15 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Re: [racket] Profiling mostly macro-generated definit
sh-ref, or (more surprisingly) my fixpoint function that does all
> the work. It is a defined, named function.
> All the functions it rendered contributed 0% to the running time.
>
> -Ian
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Robby Findler"
> To: "J. Ian
-- Original Message -
From: "Robby Findler"
To: "J. Ian Johnson"
Cc: "users"
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2012 1:23:35 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Re: [racket] Profiling mostly macro-generated definitions?
Whether the functions were created by m
Whether the functions were created by macro expansion or not won't
matter to the profiler. Maybe these functions are just not showing up
in the profile because they don't get called a lot?
But if you want to be extra sure, it is possible that if the functions
don't have a name (you can check this
What is the proper way to get the statistical profiler to be aware of function
definitions that are created by macro expansion (in different
splicing-syntax-parameterize'd blocks, if that matters)?
I have a data flow analysis framework that is parameterized by the Might/Van
Horn metafunctions f
Greg Hendershott wrote at 11/12/2011 10:20 AM:
If Neil van Dyke is reading this, I think this would be an excellent
topic for your book. What are practical ways to get the benefits of
contracts during development, while minimizing or eliminating their
cost in production? Is it as simple as "rebu
I have not tried to profile anything to be sure that I understand what
Neil T was talking about, but my experience trying to speed up
contracts in the past has led me to believe that most of the slowdown
is in creating the wrappers, not checking the predicates (at least for
contracts that are close
> - higher-order contracts and contract regions are slow
If Neil van Dyke is reading this, I think this would be an excellent
topic for your book. What are practical ways to get the benefits of
contracts during development, while minimizing or eliminating their
cost in production? Is it as simpl
Expanding on what Robby said about the statistical profiler (the
`profile' module) being more useful: I've found that the statistical
profiler more often correctly reports the names and source locations of
functions. It also doesn't require compiling your code with profiling
enabled - it just w
Excellent! This is very helpful -- thanks!
Regards,
Adam
On Nov 10, 2011, at 9:44 AM, Robby Findler wrote:
> Turning on profiling is an action in the Language dialog. It needs to
> be set up before your program is compiled (which the below doesn't
> do).
>
> Robby
Turning on profiling is an action in the Language dialog. It needs to
be set up before your program is compiled (which the below doesn't
do).
Robby
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Adam Shaw wrote:
> Thanks -- although when I tried this a dialog popped up saying "There is no
> profiling informa
Thanks -- although when I tried this a dialog popped up saying "There is no
profiling information available. Please be sure that profiling is enabled..."
So, I added two lines of code above the def'n of even?:
(require errortrace)
(profiling-enabled #t)
Same dialog pops up even so.
Regards,
A
Sorry, just 'profile'.
Robby
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Robby Findler
wrote:
> There's also the (probably more useful) racket/profile library that
> uses sampling.
>
> Robby
>
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 9:28 AM, Shriram Krishnamurthi
> wrote:
>> Here's a program:
>>
>> #lang racket
>>
>>
There's also the (probably more useful) racket/profile library that
uses sampling.
Robby
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 9:28 AM, Shriram Krishnamurthi
wrote:
> Here's a program:
>
> #lang racket
>
> (define (even? n)
> (if (zero? n) true (odd? (sub1 n
>
> (define (odd? n)
> (if (zero? n) false (
Here's a program:
#lang racket
(define (even? n)
(if (zero? n) true (odd? (sub1 n
(define (odd? n)
(if (zero? n) false (even? (sub1 n
Go to Language | Choose Language, click on Show Details, and at the
top-right, select "Debugging and profiling".
Now run the program and in the inte
Can someone point me to instructions and/or tutorial materials on how to
profile programs in DrRacket? I would appreciate it.
Thanks!
Regards,
Adam
_
For list-related administrative tasks:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
28 matches
Mail list logo
