Synopse

To content | To menu | To search

Tag - GarbageCollector

Entries feed

2014, Friday November 14

Automatic TSQLRecord memory handling

Working with objects is pretty powerful, but requires to handle manually the created instances life time, via try .. finally blocks. Most of the time, the TSQLRecord life time would be very short: we allocate one instance on a local variable, then release it when it goes out of scope.

If we take again the TSQLBaby sample, we may write:

function NewMaleBaby(Client: TSQLRest; const Name,Address: RawUTF8): TID;
var Baby: TSQLBaby;   // store a record
begin
  Baby := TSQLBaby.Create;
  try
    Baby.Name := Name;
    Baby.Address := Address;
    Baby.BirthDate := Date;
    Baby.Sex := sMale;
    result := Client.Add(Baby);
  finally
    Baby.Free;
  end;
end;

To ease this pretty usual pattern, the framework offers some kind of automatic memory management at TSQLRecord level:

function NewMaleBaby(Client: TSQLRest; const Name,Address: RawUTF8): TID;
var Baby: TSQLBaby;   // store a record
begin
  TSQLBaby.AutoFree(Baby);  // no try..finally needed!
  Baby.Name := Name;
  Baby.Address := Address;
  Baby.BirthDate := Date;
  Baby.Sex := sMale;
  result := Client.Add(Baby);
end; // local Baby instance will be released here

Continue reading...

2014, Sunday May 18

"Native" means CPU-native... even Microsoft admits it!

There were a lot of debate about what "native" was..

Especially for some great companies, you want to sell their compiler technologies...
For them, "native" is not CPU-native, but framework-native...

Even Microsoft claimed since the beginning of C# that the managed .Net model was faster, due to "optimized JIT or NGEN compilation"...

But even Microsoft is clearly changing its mind!

They switch to "Native" for their framework, especially when targeting mobile platforms!

Continue reading...

2014, Wednesday May 7

Benchmarking Mustache libraries: native SynMustache vs mustache.js/SpiderMonkey

I just wrote a small sample program, for benchmarking Mustache libraries: native SynMustache vs mustache.js running on SpiderMonkey 24...

And the winner is ...SynMustache, which is 10 times faster, uses almost no memory during process, and handles inlined {{>partials}} natively (whereas we have to handle them manually with mustache.js)!

Who says that Garbage Collection and immutable strings in modern JITted runtimes are faster than "native" Delphi applications?
Are you still preferring the "NextGen" roadmap?

Continue reading...

2014, Monday April 7

JavaScript support in mORMot via SpiderMonkey

As we already stated, we finished the first step of integration of the SpiderMonkey engine to our mORMot framework.
Version 1.8.5 of the library is already integrated, and latest official revision will be soon merged, thanks to mpv's great contribution.
It can be seen as stable, since it is already used on production site to serve more than 1,000,000 requests per day.

You can now easily uses JavaScript on both client and server side.
On server side, mORMot's implementation offers an unique concept, i.e. true multi-threading, which is IMHO a huge enhancement when compared to the regular node.js mono-threaded implementation, and its callback hell.
In fact, node.js official marketing states its non-blocking scheme is a plus. It allows to define a HTTP server in a few lines, but huge server applications need JavaScript experts not to sink into a state a disgrace.

Continue reading...

2013, Wednesday July 24

Tempering Garbage Collection

I'm currently fighting against out of memory errors on an heavy-loaded Java server.

If only it had been implemented in Delphi and mORMot!
But at this time, the mORMot was still in its burrow. :)
Copy-On-Write and a good heap manager can do wonders of stability.

Here are some thoughts about Garbage Collector, and how to temper their limitations.
They may apply to both the JVM and the .Net runtime, by the way.

Continue reading...

2013, Tuesday May 21

Performance issue in NextGen ARC model

Apart from being very slow during compilation, the Delphi NextGen compiler introduced a new memory model, named ARC.

We already spoke about ARC years ago, so please refer to our corresponding blog article for further information, especially about how Apple did introduce ARC to iOS instead of the Garbage Collector model.

About how ARC is to be used in the NextGen compiler, take a look at Marco's blog article, and its linked resources.

But the ARC model, as implemented by Embarcadero, has at least one huge performance issue, in the way weak references, and zeroing weak pointers have been implemented.
I do not speak about the general slow down introduced during every class/record initialization/finalization, which is noticeable, but not a big concern.

If you look at XE4 internals, you will discover a disappointing global lock introduced in the RTL.

Continue reading...

2013, Sunday May 19

"The shorter code, the better?"

One quick Sunday post, from a comment I wrote in a blog article.

I'm always wondering why a lot of programmers tend to implicitly assume that "the shorter source code, the better".

It is true when it means that with proper code refactoring, making small objects with dedicated methods, the code of your methods will be smaller.
It is true when you do not like to write as a "Copy & Paste" coder, without searching to put common code in shared places.

But is it true at the language level?
I mean, is it just because your ARC or GC model allow you not to manage the object memory, that it is always better?

Just some ideas...

Continue reading...

2013, Saturday May 11

Delphi XE4 NextGen compiler: using byte instead of ansichar?

When I first read the technical white paper covering all of the language changes in XE4 for mobile development (tied to the new ARM LLVM-based Delphi compiler), I have to confess I was pretty much confused.

Two great mORMot users just asked for XE4/iOS support of mORMot.

Win32/Win64 support for XE4 will be done as soon as we got a copy of it.
I suspect the code already works, since it was working as expected with XE3, and we rely on our own set of low-level functions for most internal work.

But iOS-targetting is more complex, due to the NextGen compiler, mainly.

Continue reading...

2012, Tuesday November 13

Go language and Delphi

Do you know the Go language?

It is a strong-typed, compiled, cross-platform, and concurrent.
It features some nice high-level structures, like maps and strings, and still have very low-level access to the generated code: pointers are there, in a safe strong-typed implementation just like in pascal, and there is even a "goto", which sounds like an heresy to dogmatic coders, but does make sense to me, at least when you want to optimize code speed, in some rare cases.

It is created/pushed by Google, used internally by the company in their computer farms, and was designed by one of the original C creators.

Continue reading...

2012, Monday June 18

Circular reference and zeroing weak pointers

The memory allocation model of the Delphi interface type uses some kind of Automatic Reference Counting (ARC). In order to avoid memory and resource leaks and potential random errors in the applications (aka the terrible EAccessViolation exception on customer side) when using interface, a SOA framework like mORMot has to offer so-called Weak pointers and Zeroing Weak pointers features.

Note that garbage collector based languages (like Java or C#) do not suffer from this problem, since the circular references are handled by their memory model: objects lifetime are maintained globally by the memory manager. Of course, it will increase memory use, slowdown the process due to additional actions during allocation and assignments (all objects and their references have to be maintained in internal lists), and may slow down the application when garbage collector enters in action. In order to avoid such issues when performance matters, experts tend to pre-allocate and re-use objects: this is one common limitation of this memory model, and why Delphi is still a good candidate (like unmanaged C or C++ - and also Objective C) when it deals with performance and stability.

Continue reading...

2011, Thursday December 8

Avoiding Garbage Collector: Delphi and Apple side by side

Among all trolling subject in forums, you'll find out the great Garbage Collection theme.

Fashion languages rely on it. At the core of the .Net and Java framework, and all scripting languages (like JavaScript, Perl, Python or Ruby), you'll find a Garbage Collector. New developers, just released from schools, do learn about handling memory only in theory, and just can't understand how is memory allocated - we all have seen such rookies involved in Delphi code maintenance, leaking memory as much as they type. In fact, most of them did not understood how a computer works. I warned you this will be a trolling subject.

And, in Delphi, there is no such collector. We handle memory in several ways:

  • Creating static variables - e.g. on the stack, inside a class or globally;
  • Creating objects with class instances allocated on heap - in at least three ways: with a try..finally Free block, with a TComponent ownership model in the VCL, or by using an interface (which creates an hidden try..finally Free block);
  • Creating reference-counted variables, i.e. string, array of, interface or variant kind of variables.

It is a bit complex, but it is also deadly powerful. You have several memory allocation models at hand, which can be very handy if you want to tune your performance and let program scale. Just like manual recycling at home will save the planet. Some programmers will tell you that it's a waste of cell brain, typing and time. Linux kernel gurus would not say so, I'm afraid.

Then came the big Apple company, which presented its new ARC model (introduced in Mac OS X 10.7 Lion) as a huge benefit for Objective-C in comparison with the Garbage Collection model. And let's face it: this ARC just sounds like the Delphi memory model.

Continue reading...