Re: GC generation?

2002-08-21 Thread Mike Lambert
At 6:16 PM -0400 8/20/02, John Porter wrote: Dan Sugalski wrote: I expect a UINTVAL should be sufficient to hold the counter. Why? Because you don't expect a perl process to run longer than a couple hours? Or because rollover won't matter? Rollover won't really matter much, if we're

Re: GC generation?

2002-08-21 Thread Ask Bjoern Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Sugalski) writes: Rollover won't really matter much, if we're careful with how we document things. Still, a UINTVAL should be at least 2^32--do you really think we'll have that many GC generations in a few hours? ... but having stuff running for months and months isn't

Re: GC generation?

2002-08-21 Thread Mike Litherland
I'd have to concur. I'm working on an integration engine entirely in Perl and expect many processes to stay up for months under heavy IO loads. I hope^H^H^H^Hhave confidence that p6 will be a major boon to my efforts, not a hindrance. :-) Mike Ask Bjoern Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/21/02

Re: GC generation?

2002-08-21 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 9:03 AM -0400 8/21/02, Mike Litherland wrote: I'd have to concur. I'm working on an integration engine entirely in Perl and expect many processes to stay up for months under heavy IO loads. I hope^H^H^H^Hhave confidence that p6 will be a major boon to my efforts, not a hindrance. :-)

Re: GC generation?

2002-08-21 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 2:58 AM -0400 8/21/02, Mike Lambert wrote: At 6:16 PM -0400 8/20/02, John Porter wrote: Dan Sugalski wrote: I expect a UINTVAL should be sufficient to hold the counter. Why? Because you don't expect a perl process to run longer than a couple hours? Or because rollover won't

GC generation?

2002-08-20 Thread Dan Sugalski
Would it make people's lives easier and potentially faster if we added a GC_GENERATION field to the interpreter, one we increment every time we do a GC or DOD run? I expect a UINTVAL should be sufficient to hold the counter. This way things that might have to do pointer recalcs or whatever

Re: GC generation?

2002-08-20 Thread John Porter
Dan Sugalski wrote: I expect a UINTVAL should be sufficient to hold the counter. Why? Because you don't expect a perl process to run longer than a couple hours? Or because rollover won't matter? -- John Douglas Porter

Re: GC generation?

2002-08-20 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 6:16 PM -0400 8/20/02, John Porter wrote: Dan Sugalski wrote: I expect a UINTVAL should be sufficient to hold the counter. Why? Because you don't expect a perl process to run longer than a couple hours? Or because rollover won't matter? Rollover won't really matter much, if we're careful