0004900: max_overhead vs. caml_gc_major / caml_gc_full_major

View Issue Details [ Jump to Notes ]

[ Issue History ] [ Print ]

Project

Category

View Status

Date Submitted

Last Update

0004900

OCaml

OCaml general

public

2009-10-26 08:38

2009-10-26 14:36

Reporter

shinwell

Assigned To

Priority

normal

Severity

minor

Reproducibility

always

Status

closed

Resolution

open

Platform

OS Version

Product Version

3.11.1

Target Version

Fixed in Version

3.11.2+dev

Summary

0004900: max_overhead vs. caml_gc_major / caml_gc_full_major

Description

I noticed this morning that gc_ctrl.c:test_and_compact, called from caml_gc_major and caml_gc_full_major, appears to be able to call caml_compact_heap (which doesn't test caml_percent_max) in the situation where the first calculation of fp yields >=1_000_000, caml_percent_max is set to 1_000_000, and there is more than one heap chunk.

Is the setting of caml_percent_max (aka max_overhead) to 1_000_000 not supposed to prevent automatic compaction in all cases? I wonder if the test in that function should be "fp > caml_percent_max", or whether 1_000_000 - 1 should be used for the saturating calculation.

Tags

No tags attached.

Attached Files

Relationships

Notes
(0005142) doligez (manager) 2009-10-26 14:36	well spotted

Issue History
Date Modified	Username	Field	Change
2009-10-26 08:38	shinwell	New Issue
2009-10-26 14:36	doligez	Note Added: 0005142
2009-10-26 14:36	doligez	Status	new => closed
2009-10-26 14:36	doligez	Fixed in Version	=> 3.11.2+dev