2010/10/16 Nicolas Cellier <[email protected]>:
> 2010/10/16 Eliot Miranda <[email protected]>:
>> Hi Bart, Nicolas,
>>     Bart, are you using the standard VM or Cog?
>>     Nicolas, if this is the standard VM then do the two images have the same
>> value for allocationsBetweenGCs (Smalltalk vmParameterAt: 5)?  If not, that
>> could account for the difference in incremental GC frequency (in Cog the IGC
>> trigger mechanism is different, based on space allocated not allocation
>> count).
>>
>> HTH
>> Eliot
>
> Oh, comparison was not fair, I ran Squeak with COG.
> When I try COG+Pharo, some updates are missing, I can't print the VMstats.
>
> Nicolas
>

Well, I mean in #spyAllEvery:on:

Nicolas

>> On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 6:37 AM, Nicolas Cellier
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> I can feel this slugginess too, and we should fix that for good.
>>>
>>> A clue: in Squeak trunk, here are the VM stats:
>>> uptime                  0h7m59s
>>> memory                  59,647,648 bytes
>>>        old                     48,744,032 bytes (81.7%)
>>>        young           545,352 bytes (0.9%)
>>>        used            49,289,384 bytes (82.6%)
>>>        free            10,358,264 bytes (17.4%)
>>> GCs                             288 (1665ms between GCs)
>>>        full                    0 totalling 0ms (0.0% uptime)
>>>        incr            288 totalling 486ms (0.0% uptime), avg 2.0ms
>>>        tenures         15 (avg 19 GCs/tenure)
>>> Since last view -7,895
>>>        uptime          71.2s
>>>        full                    -15 totalling -1,576ms (-2.0% uptime), avg
>>> 105.0ms
>>>        incr            -7880 totalling -1,952ms (-3.0% uptime), avg
>>>        tenures         -548 (avg 14 GCs/tenure)
>>>
>>> In Pharo:
>>> uptime                  0h6m48s
>>> memory                  29,690,612 bytes
>>>        old                     25,210,060 bytes (84.9%)
>>>        young           252,096 bytes (0.8%)
>>>        used            25,462,156 bytes (85.80000000000001%)
>>>        free            4,228,456 bytes (14.200000000000001%)
>>> GCs                             4,969 (82ms between GCs)
>>>        full                    3 totalling 834ms (0.2% uptime), avg
>>> 278.0ms
>>>        incr            4966 totalling 6,280ms (1.5% uptime), avg 1.3ms
>>>        tenures         75 (avg 66 GCs/tenure)
>>> Since last view 4,777 (85ms between GCs)
>>>        uptime          404.5s
>>>        full                    1 totalling -285ms (-0.1% uptime), avg
>>> -285.0ms
>>>        incr            4776 totalling 6,088ms (1.5% uptime), avg 1.3ms
>>>        tenures         75 (avg 63 GCs/tenure)
>>>
>>> A GC every 82ms, 20x+ more GC than trunk... Something is going wrong.
>>> Could it be object creation at each event or something like that?
>>>
>>> Nicolas
>>>
>>> 2010/10/16 Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]>:
>>> > Bart,
>>> >
>>> > On 16 Oct 2010, at 13:48, Bart Veenstra wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Hi list,
>>> >>
>>> >> I have been working with Pharo for almost a month now, and I suspect
>>> >> that the performance is degrading fast. UI tasks takes several seconds
>>> >> to react to my keyboard.
>>> >>
>>> >> At work we use VAST and I have experience with VW as well and those
>>> >> smalltaks react to my keyboard and mouse actions instantly. But Pharo
>>> >> works very sluggish.
>>> >>
>>> >> My image is about 130MB because I have loaded all dutch postcode in
>>> >> memory, but that should not affect the performance of general
>>> >> operations like typing with the keyboard. I am not a fast typer, but
>>> >> sometimes it takes seconds to show my keyboard input. I can't use the
>>> >> down key to select the right method from suggestions, because it seems
>>> >> to lockup completely.
>>> >>
>>> >> Are there ways to speedup Pharo? I would love to use cogVM but I
>>> >> haven't got gemtools working on it...
>>> >>
>>> >> Will upgrading to 1.1.1 fix these issues?
>>> >>
>>> >> Is my OS (Windows 7-64bit) causing these issues?
>>> >>
>>> >> Regards,
>>> >>
>>> >> Bart
>>> >
>>> > I am just guessing here, but I would suspect the slowdown to be related
>>> > to completion/syntax coloring issues.
>>> > You could try a pharo core image or one of lukas's builds (take
>>> > development or seaside from http://hudson.lukas-renggli.ch/).
>>> > In a large/old image, there could be lots of issues, of course.
>>> >
>>> > HTH,
>>> >
>>> > Sven
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Pharo-project mailing list
>>> > [email protected]
>>> > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>> >
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Pharo-project mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pharo-project mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>
>

_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

Reply via email to