Fcalva/cyclone
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/justinethier/cyclone.git synced 2025-05-25 13:05:05 +02:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

Handle remaining TODO's

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Justin Ethier 2018-07-26 17:43:26 -04:00
parent 09d563bf53
commit 700e39e9cb
1 changed files with 3 additions and 5 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

8
docs/Garbage-Collector-Lazy-Sweeping.md
View file

@ -207,18 +207,16 @@ Average Speedup | N/A | 10.74%
Maximum Speedup | deriv | 36.90% Maximum Speedup | deriv | 36.90%
Minimum Speedup | wc | -2.07% Minimum Speedup | wc | -2.07%
So we achieve on average a speedup of 10.74% with lazy sweeping. It is interesting that there is such a wide range of performance impacts across the whole benchmark suite. Most likely those benchmarks with the biggest speedups are those that are generating the most garbage. Alternatively, benchmarks such as `wc` are likely generating very little garbage. In particular, `wc` spends most of its time running in a tight loop that performs few allocations. Unfortunately there is some additional overhead that slightly increases the runtime for some programs. But the overall performance improvement more than compensates. Overall we achieve an average speedup of 10.74% with lazy sweeping. It is interesting that there is such a wide range of performance impacts across the whole benchmark suite. Most likely those benchmarks with the biggest speedups are those that are generating the most garbage. Alternatively, benchmarks such as `wc` are likely generating very little garbage. Case in point, `wc` spends most of its time running in a tight loop that performs few allocations. It is unfortunate that lazy sweeping slightly increases the runtime for some programs but the overall performance improvement more than compensates.
TODO: discuss why benchmarks turned out the way they did, does wc have no dead objects? what about deriv?
# Conclusion # Conclusion
TODO: are results what we expect? observations, impressions, and next steps By all accounts lazy sweeping is a great win for Cyclone and has exceeded performance expectations. Though it took some time to integrate lazy sweeping and then re-stabilize the GC code, this opens the possibility to experiment with other larger-scale GC optimizations.
# References # References
1. [The Garbage Collection Handbook: The Art of Automatic Memory Management](http://gchandbook.org/), by Antony Hosking, Eliot Moss, and Richard Jones 1. [The Garbage Collection Handbook: The Art of Automatic Memory Management](http://gchandbook.org/), by Antony Hosking, Eliot Moss, and Richard Jones
2. [Introducing Riptide: WebKit’s Retreating Wavefront Concurrent Garbage Collector](https://webkit.org/blog/7122/introducing-riptide-webkits-retreating-wavefront-concurrent-garbage-collector/), by Filip Pizlo 2. [Introducing Riptide: WebKit's Retreating Wavefront Concurrent Garbage Collector](https://webkit.org/blog/7122/introducing-riptide-webkits-retreating-wavefront-concurrent-garbage-collector/), by Filip Pizlo
3. [Scheme Benchmarks](https://ecraven.github.io/r7rs-benchmarks/), by [ecraven](https://github.com/ecraven) 3. [Scheme Benchmarks](https://ecraven.github.io/r7rs-benchmarks/), by [ecraven](https://github.com/ecraven)
4. [The Ramsey sweep](http://people.csail.mit.edu/gregs/ll1-discuss-archive-html/msg00761.html), by Olin Shivers 4. [The Ramsey sweep](http://people.csail.mit.edu/gregs/ll1-discuss-archive-html/msg00761.html), by Olin Shivers
5. [The Cyclone Scheme Garbage Collector](Garbage-Collector.md), by Justin Ethier 5. [The Cyclone Scheme Garbage Collector](Garbage-Collector.md), by Justin Ethier