[Pharo-dev] Large difference in image size when loading configuration

phil at highoctane.be phil at highoctane.be
Mon Nov 11 11:10:13 EST 2013


Yeah, that's a tad weird.

I am quite concerned about that image ballooning effect.

I've got a dev image and it is now 185.515.948

I did the flush thing

MCFileBasedRepository flushAllCaches.
3 timesRepeat: [Smalltalk garbageCollect].

and now, it is 158.740.484

SpaceTally new printSpaceAnalysis

shows:

Class                                          code space # instances  inst
space     percent   inst average size
Array                                                3712      817192
 31395576       19.30               38.42
Float                                               13047     1313593
 15763116        9.70               12.00
ByteString                                           2785      378125
 13078821        8.00               34.59
MorphExtension                                       3097      157557
 10713876        6.60               68.00
Bitmap                                               3653        1975
 10198648        6.30             5163.87
TextMethodLink                                        419      392396
9417504        5.80               24.00
Point                                                7105      711444
8537328        5.30               12.00
CompiledMethod                                      22467       82802
5215856        3.20               62.99
SHRange                                              1919      217316
4346320        2.70               20.00
Rectangle                                            8795      325385
3904620        2.40               12.00
TableLayoutProperties                                1169       49629
3573288        2.20               72.00
Semaphore                                             949      149195
2983900        1.80               20.00

A ton of MorphExtensions (which is a know problem).

but also quite some TextMethodLinks, which I do not understand.
SHRange, from styling things I guess, lots of remnants.

And quite a bunch of Semaphores, too much I think.

Tons of Arrays and floats. I do a lot of NeoCSV loads in the image.


Phil






On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven at stfx.eu> wrote:

>
> On 11 Nov 2013, at 15:51, phil at highoctane.be wrote:
>
> > Image size goes back to:
> >
> > 29.068.612
> >
> > Looks like all package contents are cached in the image…
>
> But by a factor 3 ??
>
> > Phil
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 1:32 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck <
> marianopeck at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Phil, what happens if you evaluate (and save after) to the big image:
> >
> > MCFileBasedRepository flushAllCaches.
> > 3 timesRepeat: [Smalltalk garbageCollect].
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 8:30 AM, phil at highoctane.be <phil at highoctane.be>
> wrote:
> > [User.Techlab] → du -hs package-cache
> > 5.3M    package-cache
> >
> > Phil
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven at stfx.eu>
> wrote:
> > What is the total size of the package-cache, like du -hs ?
> > Could it be the same size of the difference in image size ?
> > That would mean that the contents of the packages themselves is cached
> in the image...
> >
> > On 11 Nov 2013, at 10:39, phil at highoctane.be wrote:
> >
> > > I am experiencing the following while loading my configuration.
> > >
> > > REPO=http://www.smalltalkhub.com/mc/philippeback/HOWebStack/main
> > > ./pharo Pharo.image config $REPO ConfigurationOfHOWebStack
> --install=0.4
> > >
> > > Everything loads fine.
> > >
> > > But:
> > >
> > > with a package-cache/ empty, the final image is: 44.452.060 with a
> changes file of: 10.831.877
> > >
> > > with a primed package-cache (meaning, letting the mczs in place and
> starting with a fresh image), the final image is: 29.480.912 with a changes
> file of: 10.830.899
> > >
> > > That's quite a huge difference.
> > >
> > > I tried again to be sure (fresh image and empty package-cache, then
> fresh image only) and, weirdly enough, even if the difference in size was
> the same, the sizes themselves weren't.the same...
> > >
> > > 44.446.152 - 10.830.899
> > > 29.986.284 - 10.831.543
> > >
> > > Maybe that's due to a GC occurring differently between the two.
> > >
> > > But this gives the impression that one cannot load a base image, apply
> a configuration, and end up with the same image twice. Weird.
> > >
> > > Why is this difference so large in the first place ?
> > >
> > > Phil
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Mariano
> > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
> >
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-dev_lists.pharo.org/attachments/20131111/eb81b3de/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the Pharo-dev mailing list