From: Dan Sugalski <dan@...>
Date: 2002-09-04T11:50:49+09:00
Subject: Re: Best GC for Ruby?

At 11:09 AM +0900 9/4/02, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
>Hi,
>
>In message "Re: Best GC for Ruby?"
>     on 02/09/04, Dan Sugalski <dan@sidhe.org> writes:
>
>|Out of curiosity, have you given this a shot to see how performance
>|looks? I've been debating the merits of generational collection, but
>|I've been worried about the performance impact (and the code hassle)
>|of maintaining generation barriers.
>
>Generational GC performs quite well if there are bunch of live
>objects.  But when we implemented the generational GC for Ruby, the
>write barrier cost wasn't trivial.  As a result, we lost performance
>for avarage cases.  Probably more efficient write barrier such as card
>marking may help.  We will try again someday.

Bummer--I'd hoped you had a good solution to my existing problem. :) 
The exposure of the internals, even partially, to extensions written 
in C also seem to complicate things.
-- 
                                         Dan

--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski                          even samurai
dan@sidhe.org                         have teddy bears and even
                                       teddy bears get drunk