[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GC
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: GC |
Date: |
Sat, 25 Jun 2005 16:48:39 +0200 |
> Cc: address@hidden, Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden>, Juri Linkov
> <address@hidden>,
> address@hidden
> From: address@hidden (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ga=EBtan?= LEURENT)
> Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2005 15:10:49 +0200
>
>
> Miles Bader wrote on 25 Jun 2005 14:15:19 +0200:
>
> > Yes I think that would be a good idea. Setting the cons-threshold to
> > say 1 or 2% of RAM size would yield roughly the numbers which are
> > being recommended (at 1%, you'd get 640K on a 64MB system, and 5MB on
> > a 512MB system).
>
> This is maybe not a good idea for people who runs emacs on a big server
> with a lot a memory and a lot of users
The threshold will still be customizable. Defaults are for the
frequent situations, they aren't supposed to cover all of them.
> (my emacs is running on a server
> with 8Gb of RAM -- 66 users are currently using it --, but wasting 80Mo
> between each GC doesn't seem very smart)
The default value of the GC threshold should probably be limited
anyway, using a fixed percent on large systems might hit some quota,
and even if it doesn't, it's not a good idea to have it grow linearly.
- Re: GC, (continued)
- Re: GC, Miles Bader, 2005/06/25
- Re: GC, Adrian Aichner, 2005/06/25
- Re: GC, Miles Bader, 2005/06/25
- Re: GC, Adrian Aichner, 2005/06/26
- Re: GC, Eli Zaretskii, 2005/06/26
- Re: GC, Juri Linkov, 2005/06/26
- Re: GC, Richard M. Stallman, 2005/06/27
- Re: GC, Richard M. Stallman, 2005/06/26
- Re: GC (was: lists.texi), Miles Bader, 2005/06/25
- Re: GC, Gaƫtan LEURENT, 2005/06/25
- Re: GC,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: GC (was: lists.texi), Eli Zaretskii, 2005/06/25
- Re: GC (was: lists.texi), Richard M. Stallman, 2005/06/25
- Re: GC, Stefan Monnier, 2005/06/28
- Re: GC, Richard M. Stallman, 2005/06/28
Re: lists.texi, Luc Teirlinck, 2005/06/18