RE: sgml-parse and GC

Subject: RE: sgml-parse and GC
From: Peter Nilsson <pnidv96@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 11:43:51 +0200 (CEST)
On Tue, 20 Jul 1999, Avi Kivity wrote:

> On Tuesday, July 20, 1999 00:23, Peter Nilsson [SMTP:pnidv96@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> wrote:
> > I think the best solution would be to replace the current in memory grove
> > implementation with an implementation on disk with mmap'd files. Then all
> > groves would be cached and memory management would be passed to the
> > OS kernel. This, I think, was proposed several times before.
> > 
> 
> I believe virtual memory and memory mapped files are the same thing in terms
> of performance and OS management level. Allocating memory is similar to
> mapping some of the swap space into your virtual memory space, except the OS
> is free to choose where to place the data (possibly striping over several
> disks).
> 
Ofcourse, you're right. Sory. I don't know why that came up in my mind
yesterday.

> What you would get is grove persistence over invocations of the style
> engine, which may or may not be a win.
> 
It may be a win if you process the same document more than once. For
example if you spit out different media from the same doc or use one
document as a database which seldom changes but is searched many times.
Walsh's docbook stylesheets do this for information about images if I
remember correctly. There are other situations indeed.

Regards,
/Peter N
--
'(?P . (?e . (?t . (?e . (?r)))))


 DSSSList info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/dsssl/dssslist


Current Thread