Thanks Gergo, I think that unless we have access to your code base or a realistic example then the before vs after snapshot will not be so helpful. It's known that `ModDetails` will leak space like this.
Let us know how it goes for you. Cheers, Matt On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 11:30 AM ÉRDI Gergő <ge...@erdi.hu> wrote: > On Fri, 17 Jan 2025, Matthew Pickering wrote: > > > 1. As Zubin points out we have recently been concerned with improving > the memory usage > > of large module sessions (#25511, !13675, !13593) > > > > I imagine all these patches will greatly help the memory usage in your > use case. > > I'll try these out and report back. > > > 2. You are absolutely right that ModDetails can get forced and is never > reset. > > > > If you try !13675, it should be much more easily possible to reset the > ModDetails by > > writing into the IORef which stores each home package. > > Yes, that makes sense. > > > 3. If you share your example or perhaps even a trace from ghc-debug then > I will be > > happy to investigate further as it seems like a great test case for the > work we have > > recently been doing. > > Untangling just the parts that exercise the GHC API from all the other > in-house bits will be quite a lot of work. But if just a ghc-debug > snapshot of e.g. a small example from scratch vs. from existing ModIfaces > would be helpful (with e.g. the top HscEnv at the time of finishing all > typechecking as a saved closure), I can provide that no prob. > > Thanks, > Gergo >
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
