testing needed for branch luben/gc_threshold_adjust
wellnhofer at aevum.de
Sun Nov 28 22:09:57 UTC 2010
On 26/11/10 23:25, Luben Karavelov wrote:
> Yes, dynamic threshold is a better idea, I have tested it a month ago
> and it
> was working very well. I do not know why it is not yet merged. I have
> tried to
> locally merge master in it with some conflicts that I could not resolve.
I created a new branch nwellnhof/gc_dynamic_threshold rebased against
master that leaves out some other stuff from my old gc_ms2_tuning branch.
You can get the old behavior by setting the static threshold
(GC_SIZE_THRESHOLD) to 1/8 of system memory. Maybe we should add options
for both the static and dynamic threshold.
More information about the parrot-dev