Subclassing Engines (was Re: Moore's law and why persistence
may not be necessary. (fwd))
bparsia at email.unc.edu
Wed Jan 23 16:45:20 UTC 2002
On Wed, 23 Jan 2002, Scott A Crosby wrote:
> This method looks to be *identical* to the origional, except for
> changing the argument from 'aDocument' to 'anIndexFileEntry'
D'uh. y'know, I think I changed that first and then realized I didn't need
to but forgot to back out :)
> Subclassing the engines should never be necessary. I explicitly factored
> out the 'how to get data and how to deal with it' into adaptors so that
> the engines would be interchangeable, and updating the engine updated
> *all* users of it.
> > Indexing takes a *while*, of course. And, on this Win2000 box, squeak
> > *engulfs* all available CPU time, which makes it hard to do anything
> > else. I'm going to try threading the indexing in squeak, and see if that
> > helps.
> As long as you do that outside of my code. :)
See other message. Forking gives you back some responsiveness.
[snipped suggesting for measuring space used]
Good god, man, without persistence I'd have to *reindex*. No way ;)
> > Here are my current VM statistics for memory:
> I'd guess 20mb for the index or so.
That seems high, after niling all those things and gcing:
memory 32,311,120 bytes
old 28,114,280 bytes (87.0%)
young 124,272 bytes (0.4%)
used 28,238,552 bytes (87.4%)
free 4,072,568 bytes (12.6%)
(Closed some extra stuff too.)
Well, that's my starting point. I'm going to index the whole thingy and
see how it goes ;)
More information about the Squeak-dev