From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id OAA25419 for caml-red; Sat, 30 Sep 2000 14:54:27 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id BAA13518 for <caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr>; Sat, 30 Sep 2000 01:06:30 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from cepheus.azstarnet.com (cepheus.azstarnet.com [169.197.56.195])
	by concorde.inria.fr (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id e8TN6SL11267
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Sat, 30 Sep 2000 01:06:28 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from dylan (dialup04ip011.tus.azstarnet.com [169.197.31.139])
	by cepheus.azstarnet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA29597
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Fri, 29 Sep 2000 16:06:19 -0700 (MST)
X-Sent-via: StarNet http://www.azstarnet.com/
Message-ID: <003001c02a6a$5df967e0$210148bf@dylan>
From: "David McClain" <dmcclain@azstarnet.com>
To: <caml-list@inria.fr>
Subject: Fw: Garbage collection in OCaml
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 16:09:48 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
Sender: weis@pauillac.inria.fr

Sorry... I should have mentioned that these trials were running on Win/NT
4.0 SP3 platforms. OCaml version 3.00, with MASM 6.11.

Cheers!

- DM

-----Original Message-----
From: David McClain <dmcclain@azstarnet.com>
To: caml-list@inria.fr <caml-list@inria.fr>
Date: Friday, September 29, 2000 3:50 PM
Subject: Garbage collection in OCaml


>Hi,
>
>I have a long running analysis program written in compiled OCaml
(ocamlopt).
>If I let it run without interference it gradually allocates more and more
>memory until the system swap space is exhausted. At that point the program
>bombs off with an "out of memory" errror - probably generated by the OCaml
>array management routines.
>
>OTOH, I found by tinkering that placing a Gc.compact() in a periodically
>performed place, I manage to keep the entire system running within about 70
>MBytes. (My machines all have 256 MB RAM or more).
>
>I have found that placing a Gc.full_major() does virtually nothing to
>prevent the exhaustion of memory, although it slows it down ever so
>slightly.
>
>The program was compiled to run with the default GC settings (whatever
those
>are). That is to say, I did nothing to configure the GC system at program
>startup.
>
>Is this behavior normal? Must I plant strategic Gc.compact() in my code? I
>would have thought the GC would be more self monitoring.  Your comments are
>most welcome, even if they are critical!
>
>Cheers,
>
>David McClain, Sr. Scientist
>Raytheon Missile Systems Co.
>Tucson, AZ
>
>