From: Andreas Rottmann <a.rottmann@gmx.at>
To: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: BDW-GC branch updated
Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2009 19:15:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87eiqmmy12.fsf@delenn.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <871vn95kgo.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic Courtès"'s message of "Tue, 18 Aug 2009 15:18:31 +0200")
ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Andreas Rottmann <a.rottmann@gmx.at> writes:
>
>> Will going from a precise GC to BDW-GC not have drawbacks? IIRC, the PLT
>> people went in the opposite direction. A quick google turned up this:
>>
>> http://www.cs.brown.edu/pipermail/plt-scheme/2006-June/013840.html
>>
>> I wonder if the reasons for switching to a precise GC listed in there
>> will also apply to Guile.
>
> Thanks for the link!
>
> They write:
>
> There is one known problem, though, related to linked lists [Boehm,
> POPL'02]. Unfortunately, we seem to hit this problem often in
> practice, due to the way that threads and continuations are
> implemented, and there doesn't seem to be a reliable way around it.
>
> The paper is "Bounding Space Usage of Conservative Garbage Collectors",
> available from http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Hans_Boehm/gc/ . It
> depicts scenarios where "false references" lead to unbounded data
> retention. My interpretation of these scenarios and the "Summary"
> section is that these cases are hopefully quite rare.
>
> Now, I don't have enough experience of long-running BDW-GC applications
> to know whether it's a problem in practice. The PLT folks surely had
> more experience (but with a different implementation IIUC). There are
> also other schemes that use BDW-GC, such as Bigloo.
>
> However, it doesn't worry me as much as the current GC bugs (e.g., [0, 1]).
>
> Also, there are definite benefits to using a conservative GC for
> libguile, given how tightly it can be integrated with C (e.g., [2]).
>
My main concern is/was that by moving to a conservatice GC, and
_consequently changing the API of libguile to assume a conservative GC_
(as outlined in [2]), you get third code relying on that as well. This
would make it effectively impossible to ever switch back to a precise GC
without potentially breaking all third-party code using the libguile
API.
However, take that just as my < 2€-cent ;-).
Regards, Rotty
--
Andreas Rottmann -- <http://rotty.yi.org/>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-09-04 17:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-18 11:54 BDW-GC branch updated Ludovic Courtès
2009-08-18 12:19 ` Andreas Rottmann
2009-08-18 13:18 ` Ludovic Courtès
2009-09-04 17:15 ` Andreas Rottmann [this message]
2009-09-04 18:28 ` dsmich
2009-09-05 14:45 ` Ludovic Courtès
2009-09-10 20:09 ` Neil Jerram
2009-09-10 21:33 ` Ludovic Courtès
2009-09-16 1:11 ` Andreas Rottmann
2009-09-17 17:45 ` Neil Jerram
2009-09-05 17:22 ` Andy Wingo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87eiqmmy12.fsf@delenn.lan \
--to=a.rottmann@gmx.at \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=ludo@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).