ok I do not remember but in objectmemory there is method that retrun the size of an object (someone told me that it was a bit borken)
I do not remember its name stef
On 23 nov. 07, at 15:30, Adrian Kuhn wrote:
That is an empirical value, I created 1 Mio anonymous classes and profiled memory footprint.
Exact value was 82.4568027 (which does not make sense as its not modulo 4).
AA
On 23 Nov 2007, at 8:58 , Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
why F would be only 80 bytes? you have superclass, subclass, format, methodDict + methods inside (it does not have to have a metaclass) but may be you need it.
On 22 nov. 07, at 23:13, Adrian Kuhn wrote:
On 22 Nov 2007, at 22:39 , Tudor Girba wrote:
I believe that here there are two points under discussion, each with 2 subpoints: A1) the reasons for wide classes A2) the solutions for wide classes
B1) the reasons for collective behavior
To save memory.
Each moose element has a back pointer to its model. This is 4 byte per element, ie 4 MB per 1 Mio elements. Which are realistic maybe even low numbers when analysing histories or traces. With collective behavior the memory footprint is (4 + F) * M * T, where F is the size of an anonymous class, M is the number of models and T is the number of element types used per model. Given that F is about 80 byte (including object headers and metaclasses etc pp) and T maybe about 25, that is 2 KB = 0.002 MB per Model.
B2) the solutions for collective behavior
I propose to talk about each of these two points individually, because they are not the same to me.
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev