Browse thread
Weak hashtables & aggressive caching
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: | 2006-08-16 (04:33) |
From: | Matt Gushee <matt@g...> |
Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Weak hashtables & aggressive caching |
Jacques Garrigue wrote: >>> means that the memory set should not increase. But with external data >>> structures like pixbufs, the GC is called in a pre-programmed way, >>> currently at least after every 10 pixbuf allocations. >> You mean that LablGTK directly invokes the garbage collector after 10 images. That's not much (unless, of course, they are big images). Sounds like it's a lot of trouble for a small benefit. > > Again, the trouble is that there is only one allocation function for > pixbufs, and it doesn't look at their size. And it isn't aware of how > much memory is available either. So the choice was to be extremely > conservative. I'm sorry. I meant that my notion of preloading images would be a lot of trouble for a small benefit. I don't have sufficient expertise to judge your garbage collection strategy. Anyway, thanks for the explanation. -- Matt Gushee : Bantam - lightweight file manager : matt.gushee.net/software/bantam/ : : RASCL's A Simple Configuration Language : matt.gushee.net/rascl/ :