Mailing list for all users of the OCaml language and system.
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dario Teixeira <darioteixeira@yahoo.com>
To: Erik Rigtorp <erik@rigtorp.com>
Cc: caml-list <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: OCaml is  broken
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2009 06:27:00 -0800 (PST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <794713.82307.qm@web111510.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a57051ba0912200421w72837f94j2689dab1c2cf4dcb@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

> It's too bad that INRIA is not interested in fixing this bug. No
> matter what people say I consider this a bug. Two cores is standard by
> now, I'm used to 8, next year 32 and so on. OCaml will only become
> more and more irrelevant. I hate to see that happening.

This is a perennial topic in this list.  Without meaning to dwell too
long on old arguments, I simply ask you to consider the following:

- Do you really think a concurrent GC with shared memory will scale neatly
  to those 32 cores?

- Will memory access remain homogeneous for all cores as soon as we get into
  the dozens of cores?

- Have you considered that many Ocaml users prefer a GC that offers maximum
  single core performance, because their application is parallelised via
  multiple processes communicating via message passing?  In this context,
  your "bug" is actually a "feature".

Best regards,
Dario Teixeira






  parent reply	other threads:[~2009-12-20 14:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-12-19 19:38 Jeff Shaw
2009-12-20  4:43 ` [Caml-list] " Jon Harrop
2009-12-20 12:21   ` [***SPAM*** Score/Req: 10.1/8.0] " Erik Rigtorp
2009-12-20 13:22     ` Martin Jambon
2009-12-20 13:47     ` Yaron Minsky
2009-12-20 16:01       ` Gerd Stolpmann
2009-12-21 22:50       ` [***SPAM*** Score/Req: 10.1/8.0] Re: [***SPAM*** Score/Req: 10.1/8.0] " Erik Rigtorp
2009-12-22 12:04         ` Erik Rigtorp
2009-12-22 12:27           ` Mihamina Rakotomandimby
2009-12-22 13:27           ` Gerd Stolpmann
2009-12-23 11:25             ` Erik Rigtorp
2009-12-29 12:07         ` [***SPAM*** Score/Req: 10.1/8.0] Re: [***SPAM*** Score/Req: 10.1/8.0] " Richard Jones
2009-12-20 14:27     ` Dario Teixeira [this message]
2009-12-20 21:14       ` Jon Harrop
2009-12-21  1:08         ` Gerd Stolpmann
2009-12-21  4:30           ` Jon Harrop
2009-12-21  3:58             ` Yaron Minsky
2009-12-21  5:32             ` Markus Mottl
2009-12-21 13:29               ` Jon Harrop
2009-12-26 17:08           ` orbitz
2009-12-20 19:38     ` [***SPAM*** Score/Req: 10.1/8.0] " Jon Harrop
2009-12-21 12:26       ` Mihamina Rakotomandimby
2009-12-21 14:19         ` general question, was " Keyan
2009-12-21 14:40           ` [Caml-list] " rixed
2009-12-21 14:42           ` Gerd Stolpmann
2009-12-21 15:25             ` Eray Ozkural
2009-12-21 14:50           ` Philip
2009-12-21 15:01             ` Keyan
2009-12-21 15:13               ` Stefano Zacchiroli
2009-12-21 15:27               ` Dario Teixeira
2009-12-21 15:46                 ` Jacques Carette
2009-12-21 18:50             ` Jon Harrop
2009-12-21 18:48           ` Jon Harrop
2010-01-03 10:49           ` Sylvain Le Gall
2010-01-03 20:06             ` [Caml-list] " Jon Harrop
2009-12-21 13:07     ` [***SPAM*** Score/Req: 10.1/8.0] Re: [Caml-list] " Damien Doligez
2009-12-21 13:31   ` multicore wish [Was: Re: [Caml-list] Re: OCaml is broken] Goswin von Brederlow
2009-12-21 14:19     ` multicore wish Mihamina Rakotomandimby
2009-12-21 16:15       ` [Caml-list] " Fischbacher T.
2009-12-21 17:42       ` Dario Teixeira
2009-12-21 18:43       ` Jon Harrop
2009-12-21 19:53     ` multicore wish [Was: Re: [Caml-list] Re: OCaml is broken] Jon Harrop
2009-12-22 13:09       ` multicore wish Goswin von Brederlow
2009-12-22 19:12         ` [Caml-list] " Jon Harrop
2009-12-22 18:02           ` Edgar Friendly
2009-12-22 19:20             ` Jon Harrop
2009-12-24 12:58               ` Goswin von Brederlow
2009-12-24 16:51                 ` Jon Harrop
2009-12-24 13:19           ` Goswin von Brederlow
2009-12-24 17:06             ` Jon Harrop
2009-12-27 12:45               ` Goswin von Brederlow
2009-12-27 16:37                 ` Jon Harrop
2009-12-28 12:28                 ` Gerd Stolpmann
2009-12-28 15:07                   ` Anil Madhavapeddy
2009-12-28 18:05                   ` Xavier Leroy
2009-12-29 16:44                     ` Gerd Stolpmann
2009-12-20 11:56 ` [***SPAM*** Score/Req: 10.1/8.0] [Caml-list] Re: OCaml is broken Erik Rigtorp
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-12-19  9:30 Erik Rigtorp
2009-12-20 16:18 ` [Caml-list] " Gerd Stolpmann
2009-12-21 19:55   ` Erik Rigtorp
2009-12-21 21:21     ` Sylvain Le Gall
2009-12-29 12:00       ` [Caml-list] " Richard Jones

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=794713.82307.qm@web111510.mail.gq1.yahoo.com \
    --to=darioteixeira@yahoo.com \
    --cc=caml-list@yquem.inria.fr \
    --cc=erik@rigtorp.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox