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 SAA08642 for caml-redistribution; Mon, 6 Jul 1998 18:56:28 +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 QAA04372 for <caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr>; Fri, 3 Jul 1998 16:20:25 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from tobago.inria.fr (tobago.inria.fr [128.93.8.21])
	by concorde.inria.fr (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA20653
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Fri, 3 Jul 1998 16:20:24 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: (from doligez@localhost) by tobago.inria.fr (8.6.10/8.6.6) id QAA25762 for caml-list@inria.fr; Fri, 3 Jul 1998 16:20:23 +0200
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 1998 16:20:23 +0200
From: Damien Doligez <Damien.Doligez@inria.fr>
Message-Id: <199807031420.QAA25762@tobago.inria.fr>
To: caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: Re: Garbage collection qustion
Sender: weis

>From: Ohad Rodeh <orodeh@cs.huji.ac.il>

>However the minor_words and 
>major_words parameters increase without bound.

The current documentation of these fields is ambiguous.  In future
versions, it will read:

-     [minor_words]  Number of words allocated in the minor heap since
             the program was started.
-     [major_words]  Number of words allocated in the major heap, including
             the promoted words, since the program was started.

I hope this is clearer.

-- Damien