On Fri, Jun 02, 2006 at 10:28:06AM -0700, Jeff Rogers wrote: > I think one difference is in the tcl version itself; the latest > versions use a fast multithreaded allocator that allocates on average > slightly more than double the amount requestes, while earlier versions > may have been more frugal. You can cut your memory usage by a third or
What makes you think that earlier versions, "may have been more frugal"? Note, I'm not saying you're wrong - I don't really know. However, AFAIK, all versions of AOLserver prior to 3.5 shipped with their own customized version of Tcl, and the current Tcl 8.4.x "zippy" fast threaded allocator is derived directly from those AOLserver-specific changes. That tended to make me assume that at least by default, Tcl memory usage in AOLserver 3.x behaved in exactly the same way as it does in AOLserver 4.0.x. Perhaps this assumption is wrong? If so, how and why? > more by increasing the number of buckets defined in tclThreadAlloc.c and > making the spacing closer; there will be a bit more constant overhead > and the allocator would run microscopically slower. You may also want > to look into the ttrace module which makes all the tcl interpreters > lazily load their code instead of loading everything up front which can > be a significant savings but I have had very little luck with it (I > think the openacs code does too many fancy things to work well with it). That all sounds like good advice... Btw, I believe both Jeff Davis and Gustaf Neumann have done work on using ttrace for OpenACS, and as of Aug. 2005 Jeff said it (at least mostly) worked, e.g.: http://openacs.org/forums/message-view?message_id=318610 -- Andrew Piskorski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.piskorski.com/ -- AOLserver - http://www.aolserver.com/ To Remove yourself from this list, simply send an email to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> with the body of "SIGNOFF AOLSERVER" in the email message. You can leave the Subject: field of your email blank.
