On Oct 7, 2005, at 2:41 PM, Yoshiki Ohshima wrote:
>
>   Mark&sweep phase mutates the object headers, so almost of virtual
> memory pages (4k bytes or so) are "modified" even if you avoid the
> compaction.  Not doing compaction wouldn't change it.
>
>   Having a "full GC, fork and let the child write image to file"
> should work, and the set of pages tainted in the period of concurrent
> run may not be so big, actually.

Yeah, it doesn't seem to be.  I haven't done any detailed analysis,  
but just watching the output of top, if you take out the GC basically  
all you see is a chunk of memory being moved from the "resident" pile  
to the "shared" pile and then back again when the child process  
dies.  Whereas with the GC in the child, you get a large increase in  
total memory use for that period.

Avi