On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 2:50 PM, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de>wrote:

>
> On 16.11.2009, at 23:40, Eliot Miranda wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 5:39 AM, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de>wrote:
>
>> On 15.11.2009, at 03:46, Travis Kay wrote:
>>
>> >  I would like to see [..] 64bit (image too)
>>
>> Curious: what would you do if you could have a huge image?
>>
>
> One answer is what VW customers do with 64-bits.  Travis & Martin can give
> more up-to-date answer on this but IIRC a number of VM customers had images
> that were pushing the 4Gb limit.  One was Quallaby.  They did a network
> monitoring app that had huge numbers of large integers in a graph
> representing the state of the network.  EZBoard wanted 64-bit images because
> their message-board architecture was too monolithic.  GemStone had/have
> customers hitting 32-bit limits on numbers of objects.  So I'd sum up as
> large enterprise apps.  Travis, Martin, what's the current demand like?
>
>
> I can't quite imagine Squeak's GC giving satisfying performance with such a
> large object memory.
>

I concur :)  But that's partially my next target, both to have a more
efficient object representation (class decode is very slow with the current
one, we could do with immediate characters and in 64-bit immediate Floats)
and to provide pinning for the threaded FFI.  Its probably hubris to imagine
the product will scale to > 4Gb but I hope it won't be any worse :)



> - Bert -
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20091116/92b9b93f/attachment.htm