Re: [PATCH] more conservative heuristic for ggc-min-heapsize

[Mike Stump <mrs at apple dot com>]

On Oct 6, 2006, at 1:26 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> We have observed cases when GCC 4.1.x would fail with out-of-memory
> errors on moderately-sized source files with rlimits set to "small"
> value.

> The larger static value (20Mb vs. 16Mb) is intended to accommodate  
> larger programs

I'd phrase is this way, there is memory in use behind our back that  
we don't account for and don't control, so give them just a little  
more room to play in.  This part I think is reasonable.

> limit/4 value is adding an extra measure of conservative-ness.

I don't think a quarter of memory should be reserved for slop during  
compilations, maybe 1/10 - 1/40.  I'd rather measure the actual slop  
in use and what it is used for and go from there.  I suspect it is  
the optimizer, maybe the optimizer folks can chime in and tell us how  
much memory they want to malloc.