[Gc] powerpc64 problems
skaller at users.sourceforge.net
Wed Nov 23 13:20:18 PST 2005
On Wed, 2005-11-23 at 11:15 -0800, Boehm, Hans wrote:
> This seems to be getting slightly off subject, but since pauses usually
> seem to be blamed on garbage collectors :-) ...
> > What I actually found was the data scattered all over the
> > place. Some of the slower tests seem to hog the CPU, Linux
> > never seemed to schedule more than about 5 processes, and the
> > min/max times were spread over a huge range .. ;(
> It's actually not clear to me whether that's a bug or a feature. We're
> starting to see machines with on the order of 100,000 cache lines. At
> 100 nsecs to reload one, that comes out to potentially 10 msecs to
> reload the whole cache. If you do that once per 10 msec time slice, it
> may start to look attractive to be a little less fair, and a little
> smarter about cache reuse.
Indeed, it is this sort of thing I am interested in measuring.
[Dual CPU dual core box on the way .. :]
> I do know that a fair amount of thought and benchmark testing went into
> the linux scheduler.
Hummm .. Linux itself is highly unsuitable for what it is used
for .. we need RT/priority scheduling for desktops,
not 30 year old timesharing concepts.
John Skaller <skaller at users dot sf dot net>
Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net
More information about the Gc