home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
ftp.cs.arizona.edu
/
ftp.cs.arizona.edu.tar
/
ftp.cs.arizona.edu
/
icon
/
newsgrp
/
group98a.txt
/
000107_icon-group-sender _Mon Mar 9 07:54:02 1998.msg
< prev
next >
Wrap
Internet Message Format
|
2000-09-20
|
2KB
Return-Path: <icon-group-sender>
Received: from kingfisher.CS.Arizona.EDU (kingfisher.CS.Arizona.EDU [192.12.69.239])
by baskerville.CS.Arizona.EDU (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA20990
for <icon-group-addresses@baskerville.CS.Arizona.EDU>; Mon, 9 Mar 1998 07:54:01 -0700 (MST)
Received: by kingfisher.CS.Arizona.EDU (5.65v4.0/1.1.8.2/08Nov94-0446PM)
id AA10395; Mon, 9 Mar 1998 07:53:59 -0700
To: icon-group@optima.CS.Arizona.EDU
Date: Sat, 07 Mar 1998 05:58:37 GMT
From: ghill@waymark.net (Gary Hill)
Message-Id: <3500e0ab.4475385@news.waymark.net>
Organization: All USENET -- http://www.Supernews.com
Sender: icon-group-request@optima.CS.Arizona.EDU
Subject: Memory Use Questions
Errors-To: icon-group-errors@optima.CS.Arizona.EDU
Status: RO
Content-Length: 1384
I have a few questions about Icon memory use and garbage collection.
Perhaps someone more familiar with Icon internals can help?
I am attempting to run a large Icon v9.3 program in a DOS window under
Windows NT 4.0. Windows NT has a Virtual Memory Manager, which will
allow programs to use more memory than will fit in physical RAM by
swapping the excess to and from a disk file. Usually this is a good
thing, but when too much virtual memory is allocated to the program it
slows to a crawl because of all the paging.
When allocating a new object does Icon perform a garbage collection
before asking NT for more memory, or does it only perform a garbage
collection after asking for memory and being refused ?
I've noticed that the amount of memory used by an application under NT
increases but never decreases. Is there a way to return unused memory
back to the system after a garbage collection ?
Also:
If you create a list:
listx := list (0) ;
then assign records to it:
every idx := 1 to 10000 do {
a_record := record_builder ( x , y , z ) ;
put ( listx , a_record ) ;
} ;
then empty the list:
listx := list (0) ;
will the garbage collection process reclaim the space used by the
records if nothing else in the program refers to them? Or will they
remain because they are separate objects from listx?
Thanks,
G. Hill