On 23 November 2016 at 10:50, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 12:53 AM, Eliot Miranda <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> > On 22 Nov 2016, at 19:16, [email protected] wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 5:57 PM, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 15 November 2016 at 02:18, Eliot Miranda <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Hi Phil,
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 2:19 AM, [email protected] <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:31 AM, Denis Kudriashov <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > 2016-11-10 9:49 GMT+01:00 [email protected] <[email protected]>:
>>> > Ah, but then it may be more interesting to have a data image (maybe a
>>> lot of these) and a front end image.
>>> >
>>> > Isn't Seamless something that could help us here? No need to bring the
>>> data back, just manipulate it through proxies.
>>> >
>>> > Problem that server image will anyway perform GC. And it will be slow
>>> if server image is big which will stop all world.
>>> >
>>> > What if we asked it to not do any GC at all? Like if we have tons of
>>> RAM, why bother? Especially if what it is used to is to keep datasets: load
>>> them, save image to disk. When needed trash the loaded stuff and reload
>>> from zero.
>>> >
>>> > Basically that is what happens with Spark.
>>> >
>>> > http://sujee.net/2015/01/22/understanding-spark-caching/#.WCRIgy0rKpo
>>> > https://0x0fff.com/spark-misconceptions/
>>> >
>>> > While global GC may not be useful for big-data scavenging probably
>>> will be for any non-trivial query.  But I think I see a misconception
>>> here.  The large RAM on a multiword machine would be divided up between the
>>> cores.  It makes no sense to run a single Smalltalk across lots of cores
>>> (we're a long way from having a thread-safe class library).  It makes much
>>> more sense to have one Smalltalk per core.  So that brings the heap sizes
>>> down and makes GC less scary.
>>> >
>>> > yep, that approach what we're tried in HydraVM
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > and Tachyon/Alluxio is kind of solving this kind of issue (may be nice
>>> to have that interacting with Pharo image). http://www.alluxio.org/
>>> This thing basically keeps stuff in memory in case one needs to reuse the
>>> data between workload runs.
>>> >
>>> > Sure.  We have all the facilities we need to do this.  We can add and
>>> remove code at runtime so we can keep live instances running, and send the
>>> code to them along with the data we want them to crunch.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Or have an object memory for work and one for datasets (first one gets
>>> GC'd, the other one isn't).
>>> >
>>> > Or have policies which one can switch.  There are quite a few levers
>>> into the GC from the image and one can easily switch off global GC with the
>>> right levers.  One doesn't need a VM that doesn't contain a GC.  One needs
>>> an image that is using the right policy.
>>> >
>>> > or just mark whole data (sub)graphs with some bit, telling GC to skip
>>> over this so it won't attempt to scan it treating them as always alive..
>>> > this is where we getting back to my idea of heap spaces, where you can
>>> toss a subgraph into a special heap space that has such policy, that it is
>>> never scanned/GCed automatically and can be triggered only manually or
>>> something like that.
>>> >
>>> > Could be very useful for all kinds of large binary data, like videos
>>> and sounds that we can load once and keep in the heap space.
>>> >
>>> > How hard would it be to get something like that?
>>>
>>> Large binary data poses no problem (as long as it's not a copying GC).
>>> Since a binary blob contains no subpointers, no work needs to be done. A 1M
>>> or 1G ByteArray is the same amount of GC work.
>>>
>>
>> +1
>>
>
> Amen to that. But a dataset made of a gazillion of composites is not the
> same, right?
>
> yep, as soon as you have references in your data, you add more work for GC


> Phil
>
>>
>> _,,,^..^,,,_
>> best, Eliot
>>
>
>


-- 
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.

Reply via email to