From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Pip Cet Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: MPS: weak hash tables Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2024 19:25:53 +0000 Message-ID: References: <_mNcR6ailVKpYHLxgfo_tJlYGeR0AQIzQWluspYYp5_g5pIIKkHLNfFkklQQgOKNiVW8jn8NS3i2dJ7_B2Qyx9v-Dq3MQ9mP8HNL30UWsqY=@protonmail.com> <878qyf4sgm.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="9283"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: =?utf-8?Q?Gerd_M=C3=B6llmann?= , Eli Zaretskii , Emacs Devel To: Helmut Eller Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Jul 06 07:44:47 2024 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 1sPyE2-0002Fr-IL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 06 Jul 2024 07:44:46 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sPyDH-0001t2-7P; Sat, 06 Jul 2024 01:43:59 -0400 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 1sPoZQ-00033h-1I for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Jul 2024 15:26:13 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-4316.protonmail.ch ([185.70.43.16]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sPoZM-0004bN-4K; Fri, 05 Jul 2024 15:26:10 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail3; t=1720207556; x=1720466756; bh=hEWAim9mSDrSZqbk6x1uINRz8brEMSXkRcNSSKBKe20=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID: Message-ID:BIMI-Selector; b=PmrvWr2eCUhw8JbMkuKKDIR/zxwidRMcUuqwYsmQrgL+FX5my6xk3l4ch6xsP7/p/ YMN/zWsZg4uP+2IQliYun6Dww2/npcS1iVlFK60YT+04gYR9H15bye2/pry0McqhfM xQiUl9IL9DITXdfBvBQCsVwlzyUmnHWfqVBK+Z4GEmKb2yupCXUEWoj71UrZWWOK7N DyNhmfWy3R4IknzHmpp30t9vuwstdDx/gDgNIDIBLOAGJCXVQLNLPoi+kM/29yBkXg AbQBsQ7vKLTrk/nH6d3nMhBBBoreiAxS34v30EE1xuiDVPfKrVVtbmhlcRcOUPNwmX DJUYDlMsQeRDw== In-Reply-To: <878qyf4sgm.fsf@gmail.com> Feedback-ID: 112775352:user:proton X-Pm-Message-ID: ae15d94a61c47d8ec6ee1f804e6bcb21e029ae7f Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.70.43.16; envelope-from=pipcet@protonmail.com; helo=mail-4316.protonmail.ch 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 06 Jul 2024 01:43:57 -0400 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:321404 Archived-At: On Friday, July 5th, 2024 at 18:14, Helmut Eller w= rote: > On Fri, Jul 05 2024, Pip Cet wrote: >=20 > > Feature/bug-wise, what's still missing? > ert-tests.el worries me the most. There, MPS looks pretty bad compared > to the old GC. (Who would have thought that printing backtraces > involves copying and rebalancing interval trees with thousands of nodes? > And why does it perform so poorly with a generational GC?) >=20 > It would be nice to have a way to set a "memory limit". Preferably with > some "out of memory error". Even aborting would be better than starting > to swap. >=20 > I also think that something needs to be done about the pidigits > benchmark. It's not about the bignums (which I couldn't care less > about) but the problem that finalization messages are only processed > when Emacs is idle. Thanks! My personal priorities are correctness first (well, obviously, I do= ubt it's different for you :-) ), then responsiveness, with "don't degrade = batch performance too much" a distant third. I didn't know about the swappi= ng problem, but from what I've understood about the MPS design I'd imagine = it's pretty horrible. What I'm doing right now is alternating usleep(10000) and igc_collect() in = a secondary thread. That crashes somewhat reproducibly in interactive sessi= ons. Pip