Search Results

Search found 1329 results on 54 pages for 'garbage collecting'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 2/54 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • JVM with no garbage collection

    - by HH
    I've read in many threads that it is impossible to turn off garbage collection on Sun's JVM. However, for the purpose of our research project we need this feature. Can anybody recommend a JVM implementation which does not have garbage collection or which allows turning it off? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Getting started with the G1 Garbage Collector

    - by mikew_co
    Just before the Thanksgiving break I finished up my second Oracle by Example (OBE) course on garbage collection. This one is on the new G1 garbage available in Java 7. It provides and introduction and overview of this newly available collector. Here is the link to the course: Getting Started with the G1 Garbage Collector This is a follow up to this OBE on the basics of garbage collection. Garbage Collection Basics The OBE is based on the presentation given by Charlie Hunt and Monica Beckwith at this years Java One. Hopefully I have done justice to there most excellent session. As always, feedback and comments are welcome.

    Read the article

  • How does Garbage Collection in Java work?

    - by Bright010957
    I was wondering how the garbage collector in Java deals with the following situation. Object A has a reference to Object B and Object B has a reference to Object C. The main program has a reference to Object A. So you can use Object B trough Object A, and Object C trough Object B trough Object A. What happens to Object B and Object C, if the link between Object A and Object B is set to null? Should Object B and Object C now been collected by the Garbage Collector? I mean there is still a connection between Object B and Object C.

    Read the article

  • Garbage collection of Strings returned from C# method calls in ascx pages

    - by Icarus
    Hi, For a web application developed on ASP.NET, we are finding that for user control files (ascx) we are returning long strings as a result of method calls. These are embedded in the ascx pages using the special tags <% %> When performing memory dump analysis for the application, we find that many of those strings are not being garbage collected. Also, the ascx pages are compiled to temporary DLLs and they are held in memory. Is this responsible for causing the long strings to remain in memory and not be garbage collected ? Note : The strings are larger than 85K in size.

    Read the article

  • Efficiency of the .NET garbage collector

    - by Jonas B
    OK here's the deal. There are some people who put their lives in the hands of .NET's garbage collector and some who simply wont trust it. I am one of those who partially trusts it, as long as it's not extremely performance critical (I know I know.. performance critical + .net not the favored combination), in which case I prefer to manually dispose of my objects and resources. What I am asking is if there are any facts as to how efficient or inefficient performance-wise the garbage collector really is? Please don't share any personal opinions or likely-assumptions-based-on-experience, I want unbiased facts. I also don't want any pro/con discussions because it won't answer the question. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Quantifying the Performance of Garbage Collection vs. Explicit Memory Management

    - by EmbeddedProg
    I found this article here: Quantifying the Performance of Garbage Collection vs. Explicit Memory Management http://www.cs.umass.edu/~emery/pubs/gcvsmalloc.pdf In the conclusion section, it reads: Comparing runtime, space consumption, and virtual memory footprints over a range of benchmarks, we show that the runtime performance of the best-performing garbage collector is competitive with explicit memory management when given enough memory. In particular, when garbage collection has five times as much memory as required, its runtime performance matches or slightly exceeds that of explicit memory management. However, garbage collection’s performance degrades substantially when it must use smaller heaps. With three times as much memory, it runs 17% slower on average, and with twice as much memory, it runs 70% slower. Garbage collection also is more susceptible to paging when physical memory is scarce. In such conditions, all of the garbage collectors we examine here suffer order-of-magnitude performance penalties relative to explicit memory management. So, if my understanding is correct: if I have an app written in native C++ requiring 100 MB of memory, to achieve the same performance with a "managed" (i.e. garbage collector based) language (e.g. Java, C#), the app should require 5*100 MB = 500 MB? (And with 2*100 MB = 200 MB, the managed app would run 70% slower than the native app?) Do you know if current (i.e. latest Java VM's and .NET 4.0's) garbage collectors suffer the same problems described in the aforementioned article? Has the performance of modern garbage collectors improved? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Some Async Socket Code - Help with Garbage Collection?

    - by divinci
    Hi all, I think this question is really about my understanding of Garbage collection and variable references. But I will go ahead and throw out some code for you to look at. // Please note do not use this code for async sockets, just to highlight my question // SocketTransport // This is a simple wrapper class that is used as the 'state' object // when performing Async Socket Reads/Writes public class SocketTransport { public Socket Socket; public byte[] Buffer; public SocketTransport(Socket socket, byte[] buffer) { this.Socket = socket; this.Buffer = buffer; } } // Entry point - creates a SocketTransport, then passes it as the state // object when Asyncly reading from the socket. public void ReadOne(Socket socket) { SocketTransport socketTransport_One = new SocketTransport(socket, new byte[10]); socketTransport_One.Socket.BeginRecieve ( socketTransport_One.Buffer, // Buffer to store data 0, // Buffer offset 10, // Read Length SocketFlags.None // SocketFlags new AsyncCallback(OnReadOne), // Callback when BeginRead completes socketTransport_One // 'state' object to pass to Callback. ); } public void OnReadOne(IAsyncResult ar) { SocketTransport socketTransport_One = ar.asyncState as SocketTransport; ProcessReadOneBuffer(socketTransport_One.Buffer); // Do processing // New Read // Create another! SocketTransport (what happens to first one?) SocketTransport socketTransport_Two = new SocketTransport(socket, new byte[10]); socketTransport_Two.Socket.BeginRecieve ( socketTransport_One.Buffer, 0, 10, SocketFlags.None new AsyncCallback(OnReadTwo), socketTransport_Two ); } public void OnReadTwo(IAsyncResult ar) { SocketTransport socketTransport_Two = ar.asyncState as SocketTransport; .............. So my question is: The first SocketTransport to be created (socketTransport_One) has a strong reference to a Socket object (lets call is ~SocketA~). Once the async read is completed, a new SocketTransport object is created (socketTransport_Two) also with a strong reference to ~SocketA~. Q1. Will socketTransport_One be collected by the garbage collector when method OnReadOne exits? Even though it still contains a strong reference to ~SocketA~ Thanks all!

    Read the article

  • Doubts about .NET Garbage Collector

    - by Smjert
    I've read some docs about the .NET Garbage Collector but i still have some doubts (examples in C#): 1)Does GC.Collect() call a partial or a full collection? 2)Does a partial collection block the execution of the "victim" application? If yes.. then i suppose this is a very "light" things to do since i'm running a game server that uses 2-3GB of memory and i "never" have execution stops (or i can't see them..). 3)I've read about GC roots but still can't understand how exactly they works. Suppose that this is the code (C#): MyClass1: [...] public List<MyClass2> classList = new List<MyClass2>(); [...] Main: main() { MyClass1 a = new MyClass1(); MyClass2 b = new MyClass2(); a.classList.Add(b); b = null; DoSomeLongWork(); } Will b ever be eligible to be garbage collected(before the DoSomeLongWork finishes)? The reference to b that classList contains, can it be considered a root? Or a root is only the first reference to the instance? (i mean, b is the root reference because the instantiation happens there).

    Read the article

  • Does Marshal.ReleaseComObject call the garbage collector ?

    - by Shimrod
    Hi, I was asked this question today by a colleague, and couldn't find any clue on the Internet... Can someone tell me if calling Marshall.ReleaseComObject()directly calls the garbage collector ? As I understand it, it only removes COM references, and then the G.C. cleans memory on its next pass, but I can be mistaken... Thanks in advance for your help!

    Read the article

  • Is garbage collection supported for iPhone applications?

    - by Mustafa
    Does the iPhone support garbage collection? If it does, then what are the alternate ways to perform the operations that are performaed using +alloc and -init combination: NSXMLParser *xmlParser = [[NSXMLParser alloc] initWithData:xmlData]; UIImage *originalImage = [[UIImage alloc] initWithData:data]; detailViewController = [[[DetailViewController alloc] initWithNibName:@"DetailView bundle:[NSBundle mainBundle]] autorelease]; ... and other commands. Thank you in advance for any help or direction that you can provide.

    Read the article

  • Mixing garbage collected framework with normal code

    - by shw
    I know my way around Objective-C and I have experience with garbage collection from .NET, although I never used it in objective-c. I write my code without using it. Now I'm thinkig about using one of the frameworks (Blocks) which is available as GC-only. My question is - can I still use the framework without any changes to my current non-GC code and without using GC myself?

    Read the article

  • How much does Javascript garbage collection affect performance?

    - by Long Ouyang
    I'm writing a bunch of scripts that present images serially (e.g. 1 per second) and require the user to make either a keyboard or mouse response. I'm using closures to handle the timing of image presentation and user input. This causes garbage collection to happen pretty frequently and I'm wondering if that will affect the performance (viz. timing of image presentation).

    Read the article

  • Delay garbage collection?

    - by GeoffreyF67
    I'm using chrome (the dev version for my mac). I was looking at the timeline for my page loading and I saw that there is a 150ms delay due to some garbage collection taking place while loading the page. http://cl.ly/cce10619c698a5b276e2 It's the yellow line. I was curious if there's any way to stop this, delay it, whatever so I get the page to load faster? G-Man

    Read the article

  • Will this be garbage collected in JVM?

    - by stjowa
    I am running the following code every two minutes via a Timer: object = new Object(this); Potentially, this is a lot of objects being created and a lot of objects being overwritten. Do the overwritten objects get garbage collected, even with a reference to itself being used in the newly created object? I am using JDK 1.6.0_13. Thanks for the help.

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >