Hello Christian,
Wednesday, January 11, 2006, 4:02:10 PM, you wrote:
RtsFlags.GcFlags.minAllocAreaSize (#include RtsFlags.h first), and
call it from Haskell; the next time GC runs it will allocate the larger
nursery. Please try this and let me know if it works.
CM Can someone supply a code
Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
char *ghc_rts_opts = -A10m;
(see 4.14.5 in GHC user manual)
Yes, thanks, that is better for me
Christian
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
Hello Simon,
Tuesday, January 10, 2006, 12:26:30 PM, you wrote:
CM My old version is faster, because the version with makeStableName
does
CM very much GC.
CMMUT time 27.28s ( 28.91s elapsed)
CMGCtime 133.98s (140.08s elapsed)
try to add infamous
Simon Marlow wrote:
You can change the allocation area size from within a program quite
easily. Write a little C function to assign to
RtsFlags.GcFlags.minAllocAreaSize (#include RtsFlags.h first), and
call it from Haskell; the next time GC runs it will allocate the larger
nursery. Please
On 1/11/06, Christian Maeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Simon Marlow wrote:
You can change the allocation area size from within a program quite
easily. Write a little C function to assign to
RtsFlags.GcFlags.minAllocAreaSize (#include RtsFlags.h first), and
call it from Haskell; the next
Esa Ilari Vuokko wrote:
On 1/11/06, Christian Maeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Simon Marlow wrote:
You can change the allocation area size from within a program quite
easily. Write a little C function to assign to
RtsFlags.GcFlags.minAllocAreaSize (#include RtsFlags.h first), and
call it
I wrote:
However, shared ATerms are always different for different types,
because the corresponding data constructors are different.
This isn't quite true. The shared ATerm for the empty list is the same
for all instances.
Finally, _reading in_ shared ATerms is fast, since ghc seems to
Hi Bulat,
The difference between IntMap and HashTable is not large despite -A10m
(without this option HashTable is unusable).
HashTable:
ghc: 2754665792 bytes, 287 GCs, 26495315/147911940 avg/max bytes
residency (12 samples), 299M in use, 0.00 INIT (0.00 elapsed), 31.72 MUT
(33.78 elapsed),
Christian Maeder wrote:
Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
CM My old version is faster, because the version with makeStableName
does
CM very much GC.
CMMUT time 27.28s ( 28.91s elapsed)
CMGCtime 133.98s (140.08s elapsed)
try to add infamous +RTS -A10m switch ;)
You saved my day,
On Jan 10, 2006, at 4:26 AM, Simon Marlow wrote:
Christian Maeder wrote:
Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
CM My old version is faster, because the version with
makeStableName does
CM very much GC.
CMMUT time 27.28s ( 28.91s elapsed)
CMGCtime 133.98s (140.08s elapsed)
try to add
Jan-Willem Maessen wrote:
On Jan 10, 2006, at 4:26 AM, Simon Marlow wrote:
Christian Maeder wrote:
Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
CM My old version is faster, because the version with
makeStableName does
CM very much GC.
CMMUT time 27.28s ( 28.91s elapsed)
CMGCtime 133.98s
Christian Maeder wrote:
Simon Marlow wrote:
Right - Ptr isn't the right thing here, because GC will move objects
around. That's why we have StablePtr and StableName.
may it be that makeStableName is expensive? (or it is my additional Map?)
My old version is faster, because the version
Hello Christian,
Friday, January 06, 2006, 9:43:39 PM, you wrote:
CM My old version is faster, because the version with makeStableName does
CM very much GC.
CMMUT time 27.28s ( 28.91s elapsed)
CMGCtime 133.98s (140.08s elapsed)
try to add infamous +RTS -A10m switch ;)
it's
Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
CM My old version is faster, because the version with makeStableName does
CM very much GC.
CMMUT time 27.28s ( 28.91s elapsed)
CMGCtime 133.98s (140.08s elapsed)
try to add infamous +RTS -A10m switch ;)
You saved my day, thank you Bulat!
Without
Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
try to add infamous +RTS -A10m switch ;)
Maybe -H300m is more famous?
MUT time 24.92s ( 29.79s elapsed)
GCtime6.32s ( 7.67s elapsed)
EXIT time0.00s ( 0.00s elapsed)
Total time 31.24s ( 37.46s elapsed)
Christian
Simon Marlow wrote:
Right - Ptr isn't the right thing here, because GC will move objects
around. That's why we have StablePtr and StableName.
may it be that makeStableName is expensive? (or it is my additional Map?)
My old version is faster, because the version with makeStableName does
On Thursday 29 December 2005 18:22, Christian Maeder wrote:
Einar Karttunen wrote:
On 22.12 14:43, Christian Maeder wrote:
How can I detect this sharing in order to avoid traversing the
very same symbol table for every symbol?
By using System.Mem.StableName
SerTH
Einar Karttunen wrote:
On 22.12 14:43, Christian Maeder wrote:
How can I detect this sharing in order to avoid traversing the very
same symbol table for every symbol?
By using System.Mem.StableName
SerTH (http://cs.helsinki.fi/u/ekarttun/SerTH/) implements this,
so you can look at the source
On 22 December 2005 13:43, Christian Maeder wrote:
for storing highly shared data structures we use so called Annotated
Terms (shortly ATerms, details below).
http://www.cwi.nl/htbin/sen1/twiki/bin/view/SEN1/ATerm
In contrast to the Binary (or GhcBinary) class we compute the sharing
Dear Haskell Experts,
for storing highly shared data structures we use so called Annotated
Terms (shortly ATerms, details below).
http://www.cwi.nl/htbin/sen1/twiki/bin/view/SEN1/ATerm
In contrast to the Binary (or GhcBinary) class we compute the sharing,
which saves a lot of space for data
On 22.12 14:43, Christian Maeder wrote:
How can I detect this sharing in order to avoid traversing the very
same symbol table for every symbol?
By using System.Mem.StableName
SerTH (http://cs.helsinki.fi/u/ekarttun/SerTH/) implements this,
so you can look at the source for pointers.
I've
21 matches
Mail list logo
