#15367: Empty lists while creating parents
---------------------------+-------------------------
Reporter: roed | Owner:
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-5.13
Component: memleak | Resolution:
Keywords: | Merged in:
Authors: | Reviewers:
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
---------------------------+-------------------------
Comment (by SimonKing):
Replying to [comment:4 nbruin]:
> So I'm pretty sure we could make !MonoDict and !TripleDict quite a bit
faster and more memory-efficient by basically just copying the open hash-
table design for python's dict. We'd be working with table sizes that are
a power of two, so we'd probably want to shift the addresses that we use
as keys (given that the bottom 3 bits probably carry no information)
>
> It's quite a bit of work to get right, ...
Indeed. Thus, I think it would be a good idea to start with small steps,
that can easily be done and may improve the situation.
Namely:
- Let the default size of coercion caches be smaller. Why don't we make a
test how big the caches become in doctests? If it turns out that most of
the time we only store about 20 coercions, it does not make sense to
create 53 buckets, but 23 would be more than enough.
- Only create the dictionaries when we actually need them. I should add:
Do not initialise ''all'' coercion caches of a parent at once.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15367#comment:5>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
