<div dir="ltr">Hi Ken,<div><br></div><div> I have this very paper on my desk, printed out from (alas, much) earlier in the year. Anyone who has energy to address this would be very very welcome. Writing a concurrent incremental mark-sweep that handles ephemeron is the task. Making it function both in small bursts, e.g. after scavenging, and in its own thread is I think important; a non-threaded solution can be extremely efficient in certain contexts.</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 12:04 PM, KenD <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Ken.Dickey@whidbey.com" target="_blank">Ken.Dickey@whidbey.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 07:10:31 -0700<br>
Eliot Miranda <<a href="mailto:eliot.miranda@gmail.com">eliot.miranda@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> - an incremental global mark-sweep GC for Spur<br>
<br>
</span>One experiment with multi-cores might be interesting -- concurrent GC.<br>
<br>
The attached paper indicates an interesting strategy which worked OK for SML in terms of short pause times. Multiple cores could really reduce the total run (gc+mutate) time.<br>
<br>
The basic strategy seems simple enough that it would not be tons of work to try out.<br>
<br>
Not that I have much time either.. 8^(<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
KenD <Ken.Dickey@Whidbey.com><br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><span style="font-size:small;border-collapse:separate"><div>_,,,^..^,,,_<br></div><div>best, Eliot</div></span></div></div></div>
</div>