From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lynn Winebarger Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Indentation and gc Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2023 10:52:32 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20230310110747.4hytasakomvdyf7i.ref@Ergus> <20230310110747.4hytasakomvdyf7i@Ergus> <87a60k657y.fsf@web.de> <838rg4zmg9.fsf@gnu.org> <87ttyrwobj.fsf@localhost> <20230311111730.fatow74xnbel7t3f@Ergus> <83o7ozwju8.fsf@gnu.org> <87jzznwjh3.fsf@localhost> <83jzznwjeh.fsf@gnu.org> <87fsabwirg.fsf@localhost> <83h6urwhu0.fsf@gnu.org> <875yb7wgpd.fsf@localhost> <83bkkzwgcp.fsf@gnu.org> <87y1o3v1fr.fsf@localhost> <838rg3wf7k.fsf@gnu.org> <87v8j7v0a4.fsf@localhost> <835yb7were.fsf@gnu.org> <87r0tvuzpl.fsf@localhost> <834jqrwbgu.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000005135e505f6a1de0b" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="32674"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Ihor Radchenko , spacibba@aol.com, arne_bab@web.de, emacs-devel To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 11 16:53:46 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1pb1XS-0008DA-R0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 11 Mar 2023 16:53:42 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pb1Wf-0005sr-2y; Sat, 11 Mar 2023 10:52:53 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pb1Wd-0005sJ-Lh for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Mar 2023 10:52:51 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-pg1-x530.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::530]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pb1Wc-0005YV-5p; Sat, 11 Mar 2023 10:52:51 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-pg1-x530.google.com with SMTP id x37so257253pga.1; Sat, 11 Mar 2023 07:52:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1678549963; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=BRjx3I0kc+np+vIaqbJH13IsyIjW4xEVzUgdu59EhqU=; b=qbdzw6aLBOXuCkkWM8URG98ejEMlw9UxeQlJ06PUYF7Ygf9CUJ+dK/xXEqyP/jprjb rknqtfR8igC3A3bSZlBigZcl4pDZdXQekv9YEnjCSUqlbTSVeL5OSNVMzUwy76TemO2G 62IVBP51wWkQNokpaLghrK5opaNkoql54uDW9zYG8igTxBxohMc+lUC7ajHtlCRZXiWm 3H1ooe7tDrA2phYcS/Va7Lo53H0HcjIwAgINOFfKd1RnO+PfhpLNJDLfPRHPyUxQF97U 8T3/C6W8ClQZZit7NwGooOBHxm7+p390hka15RDCQ2s0Uu8q1pmY0hVZo0OVNDM449pp +kUw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1678549963; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=BRjx3I0kc+np+vIaqbJH13IsyIjW4xEVzUgdu59EhqU=; b=r+TZtGWFhx9i2jyRDG4gs7jmq20qqmPtCyyiDQHh2SnRnFi1As8UV8HJ+MD34qfUfW c0ROSWWlEIGzYJsEzkRhjoTi9+us0a5ywdxrjvbK8/9HCcksoUtqyVi6G2nhfX9Sj9fj +8aquuIGlX8jgY9qdnNy6UIro1mUTOtrd5mU8MqghvFr6Tphb9xBjG2xEMXKsfjJb52D fr6+KyECFM2T//9GL40AhVFDgbni7s4sVPiPulPP/mFNKomx2yySNbQEJqs1E4Evczck AF2PsDUeP6MMmnXgANhefFkQL0RlW5SsYUOaluvXJGujc9LJair4K7uC1d3d2IjdN2wC /3rg== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKUn/lBKBmesGd7KsEAEWr1ZyNcyu6Yhapa5AqGp5pbNVZWaeDhf SZuvoWUGcF5RegjsvRBXAPg/g6irXPAE1agMni9QdS7h X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set8WVKpxmlZglivvLyMPzskjnPaHsHF+RB4GQwknv1aLT/UH32+1d1MfZEm1qoM/C41x+eZwwp+7HZbgmbr5ppc= X-Received: by 2002:a65:68d6:0:b0:509:18d2:de82 with SMTP id k22-20020a6568d6000000b0050918d2de82mr376112pgt.3.1678549963583; Sat, 11 Mar 2023 07:52:43 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <834jqrwbgu.fsf@gnu.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::530; envelope-from=owinebar@gmail.com; helo=mail-pg1-x530.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:304326 Archived-At: --0000000000005135e505f6a1de0b Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Sat, Mar 11, 2023, 10:32 AM Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Again, you are reasoning about the value as if it were related to the > maximum memory footprint Emacs could have. But in fact, it is related > only to the _increment_ of memory Emacs can have before it should stop > and consider how much of that is garbage. > So, should there be a parameter that controls the maximum amount of memory emacs is allowed to allocate (and not just in the lisp heap), like an internal ulimit? The uncertainty of that limit in a given system appears to be motivating the calibration of these gc parameters. Combine that with dire warnings about the consequences of mis-setting those parameters but no apparent way to get at the cause of those settings being unsafe. Lynn --0000000000005135e505f6a1de0b Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sat, Mar 11, 2023, 10:32 AM Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
Again, you are reasoning about the value as if it were relate= d to the
maximum memory footprint Emacs could have.=C2=A0 But in fact, it is related=
only to the _increment_ of memory Emacs can have before it should stop
and consider how much of that is garbage.

So, should there be a parameter th= at controls the maximum amount of memory emacs is allowed to allocate (and = not just in the lisp heap), like an internal ulimit?=C2=A0
The uncertainty of that limit in a given system appears to be motiva= ting the calibration of these gc parameters.=C2=A0 Combine that with dire w= arnings about the consequences of mis-setting those parameters but no appar= ent way to get at the cause of those settings being unsafe.

Lynn



--0000000000005135e505f6a1de0b--