On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 9:33 AM, Dima Tisnek <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 1 June 2011 05:14, Alex Şuhan <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Hello.
> >
> > PyPy works great for our PHP JIT interpreter, with nice speedups for most
> of
> > the processing-intensive (with loops), shootout-ish scripts. However, I
> feel
> > that short scripts running often could benefit from tracing as well if we
> > make the interpreter „persistent” -- that is, keep all the scripts in
> > memory, create a jump (with a variable target) for dispatching the
> requested
> > script and a backward jump (to the fore-mentioned dispatch jump) at the
> end
> > of each script. This article:
> >
> http://morepypy.blogspot.com/2010/11/improving-memory-behaviour-to-make-self.html
> > refers to the loop_longevity JIT parameter, which suggests it's possible
> to
> > have alternative executions between different scripts and PyPy will
> simply
> > pick the appropriate trace as long as it's not too old.
> >
> > Other than the obvious duct taping, are there any caveats to this
> solution?
> >
> > --
> > asuhan
> > _______________________________________________
> > pypy-dev mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
> >
>
> Would it be practical to add compiled traces to xcache cache? (or
> .pyo/.pyj in python-speak)
>
> d.
> _______________________________________________
> pypy-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
>

No, compiled traces contain lots of pointers into the memory of a program,
not symbolic references.

Alex

-- 
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to
say it." -- Evelyn Beatrice Hall (summarizing Voltaire)
"The people's good is the highest law." -- Cicero
_______________________________________________
pypy-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev

Reply via email to