[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#37006: 27.0.50; garbage collection not happening after 26de2d42

From: Paul Eggert
Subject: bug#37006: 27.0.50; garbage collection not happening after 26de2d42
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 18:37:44 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0

Eli Zaretskii wrote:

However, I'd rather we don't invent new data types unless really

I did that yesterday, in commit 2019-08-13T19:20:40Z!address@hidden (b80559be212292d44ce14ca5e94505cab4d9a868).

gc-cons-threshold is a Lisp integer, a
fixnum, so it cannot exceed EMACS_INT_MAX, I think.

No, (setq gc-cons-threshold (1+ most-positive-fixnum)) works and does the right thing. The variable's value can be any intmax_t value. This is useful for quantities like GC object byte counts that might not fit into fixnums.

Can we use for this purpose the existing trapped_write
field of Lisp_Symbol that is the base for implementing Lisp watcher

Don't see why not.

With the old code, whenever memory-full was non-nil, and
consing_since_gc was more than the size of cons_block (about 1KB on my
system), the very next maybe_gc call would actually trigger GC.  With
the new code, no matter how much consing happened before memory-full
became non-nil, we still need to cons 1KB worth of objects before GC
happens.  This 1KB might be critical when we are out of memory.

I don't think the scenario is worth worrying about doing a GC now rather than later. But if we go the trapped_write route, this issue won't matter since the GC will be done quickly.

Immediate-GC might cause GC thrashing, no?

Not sure how, can you elaborate?

When EMacs is low on memory, if we're not careful Emacs could GC every time maybe_gc is called, which will be roughly equivalent to Emacs hanging and doing nothing.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]