Subclassing Engines (was Re: Moore's law and why persistence may not be necessary. (fwd))

Bijan Parsia bparsia at email.unc.edu
Wed Jan 23 16:45:20 UTC 2002


On Wed, 23 Jan 2002, Scott A Crosby wrote:

[snip]
> 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 :)

[snip]
> 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.

Yep, nice.

[snip]
> > 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 ;)

Cheers,
Bijan Parsia.




More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list