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 XAA21292 for caml-redistribution; Thu, 2 Jul 1998 23:27:28 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA00769 for <caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr>; Thu, 2 Jul 1998 10:09:58 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from cs.huji.ac.il (cs.huji.ac.il [132.65.16.10])
	by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA08295;
	Thu, 2 Jul 1998 10:09:55 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from hamster.cs.huji.ac.il ([132.65.200.30] ident=orodeh)
	by cs.huji.ac.il with esmtp (Exim 1.950 #1)
	id 0yreRD-00051b-00; Thu, 2 Jul 1998 11:09:51 +0300
Received: from localhost (orodeh@localhost) by hamster.cs.huji.ac.il (8.8.5/1.1c) with SMTP
  id LAA03473; Thu, 2 Jul 1998 11:09:52 +0300 (IDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: hamster.cs.huji.ac.il: orodeh owned process doing -bs
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 1998 11:09:52 +0300 (IDT)
From: Ohad Rodeh <orodeh@cs.huji.ac.il>
To: Damien Doligez <Damien.Doligez@inria.fr>
cc: caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: Re: Garbage collection qustion
In-Reply-To: <199807010926.LAA20020@tobago.inria.fr>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSI.3.96.980702110728.950B-100000@hamster.cs.huji.ac.il>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: weis



On Wed, 1 Jul 1998, Damien Doligez wrote:

> 
> >From: Ohad Rodeh <orodeh@cs.huji.ac.il>
> 
> >[allocation: minor=0.0M (4% promoted) (direct major=0K)|collections:
> >minor=1, major=0, compact=0|words: 63488 (0% live) (1 chunks)|blocks: 120
> >(99% live) (largest_free=62878)]
> [...]
> >[allocation: minor=2.7M (0% promoted) (direct major=0K)|collections:
> >minor=91, major=21, compact=3|words: 63488 (1% live) (1 chunks)|blocks:
> >255 (99% live) (largest_free=62343)]
> 
> I think you are misinterpreting the numbers.  The relevant variable
> here is heap_words, which doesn't increase at all.
> 
> Does the size of your process (as reported by ps) actually increase ?
> 
> -- Damien
> 
> 
> 
Yes, the heap_words parameter does not increase, niether does (ps) report
an increase in memory use by the processs. However the minor_words and 
major_words parameters increase without bound. This is misleading as these
parameters record the amount of words allocated in the minor and major
heaps respectively. 

	Ohad.