[Gc] Re: SMALL_CONFIG a bad idea? (Was: Understanding why GC'ing increases to the double in time?)

Boehm, Hans hans.boehm at hp.com
Tue Apr 11 13:10:10 PDT 2006


SMALL_CONFIG was really designed for very small configurations, e.g. 1
or 2 MB heaps.  And it tries to save space at the expense of speed.  It
looks like it's clearly suboptimal in your configuration, and probably
for any use with gcj.

Hans

> -----Original Message-----
> From: gc-bounces at napali.hpl.hp.com 
> [mailto:gc-bounces at napali.hpl.hp.com] On Behalf Of Martin 
> Egholm Nielsen
> Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 1:27 AM
> To: gc at napali.hpl.hp.com
> Subject: [Gc] Re: SMALL_CONFIG a bad idea? (Was: 
> Understanding why GC'ing increases to the double in time?)
> 
> > I know this thread is dead (thanks!), but my mind keeps 
> returning to 
> > your comment below, wondering about its meaning:
> > 
> >> The only things I noticed where:
> >>
> >> 1) You seem to be running with a block size of 1K instead of the 
> >> normal 4K.  That's probably good.  But if that's a 
> consequence of the 
> >> collector having been configured with SMALL_CONFIG, it 
> might be worth revisiting.
> >> (It looks like that's not the case, but ...)
> 
> > As I read it, it almost seems like a bad idea running with 
> SMALL_CONFIG?
> Well, I see there is a noticable speed difference running 
> with SMALL_CONFIG - it's about 20% slower configured this way.
> 
> // Martin
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gc mailing list
> Gc at linux.hpl.hp.com
> http://www.hpl.hp.com/hosted/linux/mail-archives/gc/
> 



More information about the Gc mailing list