Issue 113101: Don't keep data about JS code that is never executed, optimize static symbols loading

Keyboard Shortcuts

	File
u :	up to issue
j / k :	jump to file after / before current file
J / K :	jump to next file with a comment after / before current file
	Side-by-side diff
i :	toggle intra-line diffs
e :	expand all comments
c :	collapse all comments
s :	toggle showing all comments
n / p :	next / previous diff chunk or comment
N / P :	next / previous comment
<Up> / <Down> :	next / previous line

	Issue
u :	up to list of issues
j / k :	jump to patch after / before current patch
o / <Enter> :	open current patch in side-by-side view
i :	open current patch in unified diff view

	Issue List
j / k :	jump to issue after / before current issue
o / <Enter> :	open current issue

Issue 113101: Don't keep data about JS code that is never executed, optimize static symbols loading (Closed)

Created:
11 years, 7 months ago by Mikhail Naganov

Modified:
9 years, 7 months ago

Reviewers:
Søren Thygesen Gjesse

CC:
v8-dev

Visibility:
Public.

Description

Don't keep data about JS code that is never executed. This reduces memory usage of tickprocessor. Thanks to William Hesse for pointing out this issue. Also speed up static symbols loading. Committed: http://code.google.com/p/v8/source/detail?r=1902

Patch Set 1 #

Patch Set 2 : Also optimized static symbols loading #

Total comments: 2

Created: 11 years, 7 months ago

Download [raw] [tar.bz2]

	Unified diffs	Side-by-side diffs	Delta from patch set	Stats (+89 lines, -33 lines)			Patch
M	test/mjsunit/tools/codemap.js	View		1 chunk	+32 lines, -0 lines	0 comments	Download
M	tools/codemap.js	View		6 chunks	+12 lines, -11 lines	2 comments	Download
M	tools/tickprocessor.js	View	1	9 chunks	+45 lines, -22 lines	0 comments	Download

Messages

Total messages: 4 (0 generated)

Expand Messages | Collapse Messages

Søren Thygesen Gjesse

LGTM Does it process Bill's 200Mb log-file now? Maybe we still need Java -Xmx like ...

11 years, 7 months ago (2009-05-08 09:54:48 UTC) #3

Mikhail Naganov

11 years, 7 months ago (2009-05-08 11:25:40 UTC) #4

I tried this version on my own log generated using 'parsy' benchmark with 1000
iterations. The log had 175M size and 165K ticks. It was successfully processed,
and d8 was consuming only about 370M of memory during processing.

http://codereview.chromium.org/113101/diff/1004/8
File tools/codemap.js (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/113101/diff/1004/8#newcode168
Line 168: if (!dynaEntry.nameUpdated_) {
On 2009/05/08 09:54:48, Søren Gjesse wrote:
> Is it alright to access 'private' members using other than this? As CodeEntry
in
> inside CodeMap it is probably fine.

I think so.

Expand Messages | Collapse Messages