[gambit-list] Gambit-C 4.0 beta 13

ben at fuhok.net ben at fuhok.net
Thu May 12 20:18:53 EDT 2005

On Thu, May 12, 2005 at 06:41:19PM -0400, Guillaume Germain wrote:
> On Thu, 12 May 2005 ben at fuhok.net wrote:
> I don't think that's correct.  Gambit's serialization of continuation is 
> slow, at least in part due to linear lookups being done on all the 
> serialized data when constructing the external representation.  Because of 
> the closure representation used in the interpreter a lot of data gets 
> included.  The new table facility might be used to help implement this in 
> a more efficient way.

That sounds reasonable.  My experience with continuation serialization
consists of running the example from the manual.

> >The example passes the continuation around via a query parameter, not by 
> >a hidden form field (though the continuation is included there too).
> Note that it doesn't matter if you're using GET whether you pass the 
> continuation in a hidden form field or by tacking it to the URL.
> >I bet that the example would run very well if the continuation was
> >passed around using POST instead of GET.

Though I think I was way off on the cause of this problem, it does
matters a little whether you GET or POST, since there can be a limit
to amount of data you can pass with GET.  I couldn't get the example
to work with IE, maybe for that reason.

> It would still be slow.  I use continuation serialization to implement 
> process migration in my system and even a "small continuation" will take 
> around a second or two to serialize.  When I was including libraries like 
> SSAX or htmlprag, the system was hanging for minutes.  At first I thought 
> my program was stuck in an infinite loop, but that's because I was 
> underestimating infinity :)

When I run the example, it is indeed a little slower when interpreted,
but only by 1-2 seconds.  I'm not experiencing 30+ second delays for
whatever reason.

Thanks for clearing that up for me,


More information about the Gambit-list mailing list