[squeak-dev] 3.10 image
Locked
 
|
I the damien-3.10-web image size is quite large (129M) compared to a
comparably (not identical) loaded 3.9 Ramon's image (42M). Is that expected, or is it because as a beta it has not been trimmed etc.? Thanks - Sophie |
Re: [squeak-dev] 3.10 image
|
|
itsme213 wrote:
> I the damien-3.10-web image size is quite large (129M) compared to a > comparably (not identical) loaded 3.9 Ramon's image (42M). Is that expected, > or is it because as a beta it has not been trimmed etc.? > > Thanks - Sophie > > > > > new image (for your everyday work, so you have the original image intact) the new saved image is trimmed to about 34MB. Cheers |
|
|
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 7:02 AM, Miguel Enrique Cobá Martínez
<[hidden email]> wrote: > > itsme213 wrote: > > I the damien-3.10-web image size is quite large (129M) compared to a > > comparably (not identical) loaded 3.9 Ramon's image (42M). Is that expected, > > or is it because as a beta it has not been trimmed etc.? > > > > > I noted this too. But if you save the original image from Damien to a > new image (for your everyday work, so you have the original image > intact) the new saved image is trimmed to about 34MB. Can somebody help me? -- Damien Cassou |
|
|
On Feb 25, 2008, at 9:23 , Damien Cassou wrote: > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 7:02 AM, Miguel Enrique Cobá Martínez > <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> itsme213 wrote: >>> I the damien-3.10-web image size is quite large (129M) compared to a >>> comparably (not identical) loaded 3.9 Ramon's image (42M). Is >>> that expected, >>> or is it because as a beta it has not been trimmed etc.? >>> >>> >> I noted this too. But if you save the original image from Damien >> to a >> new image (for your everyday work, so you have the original image >> intact) the new saved image is trimmed to about 34MB. > > I can't trimmed my image with this method... Don't know what happens. Try a different VM? - Bert - |
|
|
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 10:37 AM, Bert Freudenberg <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > On Feb 25, 2008, at 9:23 , Damien Cassou wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 7:02 AM, Miguel Enrique Cobá Martínez > > <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> > >> itsme213 wrote: > >>> I the damien-3.10-web image size is quite large (129M) compared to a > >>> comparably (not identical) loaded 3.9 Ramon's image (42M). Is > >>> that expected, > >>> or is it because as a beta it has not been trimmed etc.? > >>> > >>> > >> I noted this too. But if you save the original image from Damien > >> to a > >> new image (for your everyday work, so you have the original image > >> intact) the new saved image is trimmed to about 34MB. > > > > I can't trimmed my image with this method... Don't know what happens. > > Try a different VM? $ squeak -version 3.9-12 #2 mercredi 10 octobre 2007, 18:07:20 (UTC+0200) version 4.1.3 Squeak3.9alpha of 4 July 2005 [latest update: #7021] Linux bedous 2.6.22-14-generic #1 SMP Tue Oct 9 09:51:52 GMT 2007 i686 GNU/Linux default plugin location: /usr/local/lib/squeak/3.9-12/*.so Do you think I need to try another version? -- Damien Cassou |
|
|
Try "MCFileBasedRepository flushAllCaches" before saving 129MB -> 28.5MB !
> -----Original Message----- > From: [hidden email] > [mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of > Damien Cassou > Sent: 25 February 2008 9:43 AM > To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list > Subject: Re: [squeak-dev] 3.10 image > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 10:37 AM, Bert Freudenberg > <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > > > On Feb 25, 2008, at 9:23 , Damien Cassou wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 7:02 AM, Miguel Enrique Cobá Martínez > > > <[hidden email]> wrote: > > >> > > >> itsme213 wrote: > > >>> I the damien-3.10-web image size is quite large (129M) > compared to a > > >>> comparably (not identical) loaded 3.9 Ramon's image (42M). Is > > >>> that expected, > > >>> or is it because as a beta it has not been trimmed etc.? > > >>> > > >>> > > >> I noted this too. But if you save the original image from Damien > > >> to a > > >> new image (for your everyday work, so you have the original image > > >> intact) the new saved image is trimmed to about 34MB. > > > > > > I can't trimmed my image with this method... Don't know what happens. > > > > Try a different VM? > > Mine is pretty recent and I think I compiled it myself through subversion: > > $ squeak -version > 3.9-12 #2 mercredi 10 octobre 2007, 18:07:20 (UTC+0200) version 4.1.3 > Squeak3.9alpha of 4 July 2005 [latest update: #7021] > Linux bedous 2.6.22-14-generic #1 SMP Tue Oct 9 09:51:52 GMT 2007 > i686 GNU/Linux > default plugin location: /usr/local/lib/squeak/3.9-12/*.so > > Do you think I need to try another version? > > > -- > Damien Cassou > |
|
|
In reply to this post by Damien Cassou-3
On Feb 25, 2008, at 10:42 , Damien Cassou wrote: > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 10:37 AM, Bert Freudenberg > <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> >> On Feb 25, 2008, at 9:23 , Damien Cassou wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 7:02 AM, Miguel Enrique Cobá Martínez >>> <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>> >>>> itsme213 wrote: >>>>> I the damien-3.10-web image size is quite large (129M) compared >>>>> to a >>>>> comparably (not identical) loaded 3.9 Ramon's image (42M). Is >>>>> that expected, >>>>> or is it because as a beta it has not been trimmed etc.? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> I noted this too. But if you save the original image from Damien >>>> to a >>>> new image (for your everyday work, so you have the original image >>>> intact) the new saved image is trimmed to about 34MB. >>> >>> I can't trimmed my image with this method... Don't know what >>> happens. >> >> Try a different VM? > > Mine is pretty recent and I think I compiled it myself through > subversion: > > $ squeak -version > 3.9-12 #2 mercredi 10 octobre 2007, 18:07:20 (UTC+0200) version 4.1.3 > Squeak3.9alpha of 4 July 2005 [latest update: #7021] > Linux bedous 2.6.22-14-generic #1 SMP Tue Oct 9 09:51:52 GMT 2007 > i686 GNU/Linux > default plugin location: /usr/local/lib/squeak/3.9-12/*.so > > Do you think I need to try another version? Only if your VM is somehow special and does not collect garbage when saving. If the report above by Miguel is correct (that he simply loaded and saved the image) and the same does not work for you then it certainly must be the VM. Although I think this is rather unlikely. Try emptying the MC caches and saving. - Bert - |
|
|
Ok, future versions will be much smaller. Thanks.
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 12:01 PM, Bert Freudenberg <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > On Feb 25, 2008, at 10:42 , Damien Cassou wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 10:37 AM, Bert Freudenberg > > <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> > >> > >> On Feb 25, 2008, at 9:23 , Damien Cassou wrote: > >> > >>> On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 7:02 AM, Miguel Enrique Cobá Martínez > >>> <[hidden email]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> itsme213 wrote: > >>>>> I the damien-3.10-web image size is quite large (129M) compared > >>>>> to a > >>>>> comparably (not identical) loaded 3.9 Ramon's image (42M). Is > >>>>> that expected, > >>>>> or is it because as a beta it has not been trimmed etc.? > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> I noted this too. But if you save the original image from Damien > >>>> to a > >>>> new image (for your everyday work, so you have the original image > >>>> intact) the new saved image is trimmed to about 34MB. > >>> > >>> I can't trimmed my image with this method... Don't know what > >>> happens. > >> > >> Try a different VM? > > > > Mine is pretty recent and I think I compiled it myself through > > subversion: > > > > $ squeak -version > > 3.9-12 #2 mercredi 10 octobre 2007, 18:07:20 (UTC+0200) version 4.1.3 > > Squeak3.9alpha of 4 July 2005 [latest update: #7021] > > Linux bedous 2.6.22-14-generic #1 SMP Tue Oct 9 09:51:52 GMT 2007 > > i686 GNU/Linux > > default plugin location: /usr/local/lib/squeak/3.9-12/*.so > > > > Do you think I need to try another version? > > Only if your VM is somehow special and does not collect garbage when > saving. If the report above by Miguel is correct (that he simply > loaded and saved the image) and the same does not work for you then > it certainly must be the VM. Although I think this is rather > unlikely. Try emptying the MC caches and saving. > > - Bert - > > > > -- Damien Cassou |
|
|
> Behalf Of Damien Cassou
> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 8:07 AM > To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list > Subject: Re: [squeak-dev] 3.10 image > > Ok, future versions will be much smaller. Thanks. Here's what I run when saving a clean image, usually gets me to around 30meg with all the dev tools loaded. customGarbageCollect | tasks | tasks := OrderedCollection new add: [ EventManager cleanUp ] ; add: [ SmalltalkImage cleanUp ] ; add: [ MCMethodDefinition cleanUp ] ; add: [ MCFileBasedRepository flushAllCaches ] ; add: [ WARegistry clearAllHandlers ] ; add: [ SMSqueakMap default clearCaches ] ; add: [ Smalltalk removeEmptyMessageCategories ] ; add: [ Utilities cleanseOtherworldlySteppers ] ; add: [ Workspace allSubInstancesDo: [ : each | each setBindings: Dictionary new ] ] ; add: [ Undeclared removeUnreferencedKeys ] ; add: [ Categorizer sortAllCategories ] ; add: [ Symbol compactSymbolTable ] ; add: [ ReleaseBuilderDeveloper new fixObsoleteReferences ] ; add: [ Smalltalk garbageCollectMost ] ; yourself. Utilities informUserDuring: [ : bar | tasks do: [ : block | bar value: block printString. [ block value ] on: Error do: [ : error | Transcript show: error ; cr ] ] ]. SystemNavigation default obsoleteClasses isEmpty ifTrue: [ SmalltalkImage current saveSession ] ifFalse: [ (self confirm: 'PointerFinder on obsolete classes') ifFalse: [ ^ self ]. SystemNavigation default obsoleteClasses do: [ : each | [ PointerFinder on: each ] on: Error do: [ : error | Transcript show: error ; cr ] ] ] Ramon Leon http://onsmalltalk.com |
|
|
Guess we all have our own cleanup scripts ;-)
> -----Original Message----- > From: [hidden email] > [mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of Ramon > Leon > Sent: 25 February 2008 4:13 PM > To: 'The general-purpose Squeak developers list' > Subject: RE: [squeak-dev] 3.10 image > > > > Behalf Of Damien Cassou > > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 8:07 AM > > To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list > > Subject: Re: [squeak-dev] 3.10 image > > > > Ok, future versions will be much smaller. Thanks. > > Here's what I run when saving a clean image, usually gets me to > around 30meg > with all the dev tools loaded. > > customGarbageCollect > | tasks | > tasks := OrderedCollection new > add: [ EventManager cleanUp ] ; > add: [ SmalltalkImage cleanUp ] ; > add: [ MCMethodDefinition cleanUp ] ; > add: [ MCFileBasedRepository flushAllCaches ] ; > add: [ WARegistry clearAllHandlers ] ; > add: [ SMSqueakMap default clearCaches ] ; > add: [ Smalltalk removeEmptyMessageCategories ] ; > add: [ Utilities cleanseOtherworldlySteppers ] ; > add: [ Workspace allSubInstancesDo: [ : each | each > setBindings: Dictionary new ] ] ; > add: [ Undeclared removeUnreferencedKeys ] ; > add: [ Categorizer sortAllCategories ] ; > add: [ Symbol compactSymbolTable ] ; > add: [ ReleaseBuilderDeveloper new fixObsoleteReferences ] ; > add: [ Smalltalk garbageCollectMost ] ; > yourself. > Utilities informUserDuring: > [ : bar | > tasks do: > [ : block | > bar value: block printString. > [ block value ] > on: Error > do: > [ : error | > Transcript > show: error ; > cr ] ] ]. > SystemNavigation default obsoleteClasses isEmpty > ifTrue: [ SmalltalkImage current saveSession ] > ifFalse: > [ (self confirm: 'PointerFinder on obsolete > classes') ifFalse: [ ^ self ]. > SystemNavigation default obsoleteClasses do: > [ : each | > [ PointerFinder on: each ] > on: Error > do: > [ : error | > Transcript > show: error ; > cr ] ] ] > > Ramon Leon > http://onsmalltalk.com > > |
|
|
Thank you.
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 5:26 PM, Gary Chambers <[hidden email]> wrote: Guess we all have our own cleanup scripts ;-) -- Damien Cassou |
|
|
In reply to this post by Damien Cassou-3
I've noticed that sq3.10-7159dev08.02.1 right out of the zip is 65.2 MB but after executing Keith's level playing field script and a few other things, then doing
as Esteban Lorenzano <[hidden email]> did in his sample script recently posted here on Mon, 11 Feb 2008. "******************************" "Cleanups" "******************************" MCFileBasedRepository flushAllCaches. Smalltalk garbageCollect. then: "*** Save as a new version ***************************" SmalltalkImage current saveAsNewVersion. the image is then only 20.2 MB. By the way, I'm finding that Keith's Installer <http://installer.pbwiki.com/Installer> is great! Ken G. Brown At 2:23 AM -0800 2/25/08, [hidden email] apparently wrote: >Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 00:02:10 -0600 >From: Miguel Enrique Cob? Mart?nez <[hidden email]> >Subject: Re: [squeak-dev] 3.10 image >To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list > <[hidden email]> >Message-ID: <[hidden email]> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > >itsme213 wrote: >> I the damien-3.10-web image size is quite large (129M) compared to a >> comparably (not identical) loaded 3.9 Ramon's image (42M). Is that expected, >> or is it because as a beta it has not been trimmed etc.? >> >> Thanks - Sophie >> >> >> >> >> >I noted this too. But if you save the original image from Damien to a >new image (for your everyday work, so you have the original image >intact) the new saved image is trimmed to about 34MB. > >Cheers |
|
|
In reply to this post by Damien Cassou-3
It's really time to think about what Keith proposed a while ago:
I am all for it, to include #cleanUp message to standard Behavior protocol. So people shouldn't write own sophisticated cleanUp scripts, and do just: Smalltalk cleanUp. And package authors implement own #cleanUp in classes, where they think it needs to. (Sorry i can't find this mail in archives, so i putting it as text here) ------------------- Dear All, If possible I would like to encourage package developers to support two conventions for cleaning up images Firstly to remember to adopt the memory hogs convention (which is rarely used) of implementing #freeSomeSpace. Although the lowspace watcher currently requires potential memory hogs to register themselves, I propose implementing the methods anyway, with a utility method available via 'SmalltalkImage current freeSpace' to invoke an image wide belt tightening. #freeSomeSpace would be for cleaning out caches and so forth that would not imped normal functioning. examples: Utilities-class-#freeSomeSpace self cleanseOtherworldlySteppers Secondly to formalize #cleanUp as a message that users will send in order to try and tidy up an image as much as possible before saving or deploying. examples: In Seaside this would require: WACachedDocument class-#cleanUp self clearCache WAHalo-class-#cleanUp self initialize WAKom-class-#cleanUp self stop WARegistry class-#cleanUp self clearAllHandlers In DynamicProtocols this would require DynamicProtocols-#cleanUp self invalidateCache I am sure there are many other instances where this would be useful. how about it? Keith ------------------- -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig. |
|
|
In reply to this post by Damien Cassou-3
+1 from me
----- Original message ----- From: Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]> To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list <[hidden email]> Sent: Mon, 25 Feb 2008, 19:57:14 GMT Subject: Re: [squeak-dev] 3.10 image It's really time to think about what Keith proposed a while ago: I am all for it, to include #cleanUp message to standard Behavior protocol. So people shouldn't write own sophisticated cleanUp scripts, and do just: Smalltalk cleanUp. And package authors implement own #cleanUp in classes, where they think it needs to. (Sorry i can't find this mail in archives, so i putting it as text here) ------------------- Dear All, If possible I would like to encourage package developers to support two conventions for cleaning up images Firstly to remember to adopt the memory hogs convention (which is rarely used) of implementing #freeSomeSpace. Although the lowspace watcher currently requires potential memory hogs to register themselves, I propose implementing the methods anyway, with a utility method available via 'SmalltalkImage current freeSpace' to invoke an image wide belt tightening. #freeSomeSpace would be for cleaning out caches and so forth that would not imped normal functioning. examples: Utilities-class-#freeSomeSpace self cleanseOtherworldlySteppers Secondly to formalize #cleanUp as a message that users will send in order to try and tidy up an image as much as possible before saving or deploying. examples: In Seaside this would require: WACachedDocument class-#cleanUp self clearCache WAHalo-class-#cleanUp self initialize WAKom-class-#cleanUp self stop WARegistry class-#cleanUp self clearAllHandlers In DynamicProtocols this would require DynamicProtocols-#cleanUp self invalidateCache I am sure there are many other instances where this would be useful. how about it? Keith ------------------- -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig. |
|
|
Dear All,
I have added some of these #cleanUp methods and SmalltalkImage current cleanUpAll. to KernelExt package in squeaksource.com/311 in the hope that they might become adopted in future images. best regards Keith |
|
|
In reply to this post by Ken G. Brown
"Ken G. Brown" <[hidden email]> wrote in message
> By the way, I'm finding that Keith's Installer > <http://installer.pbwiki.com/Installer> is great! +1 !! |
|
|
In reply to this post by Ramon Leon-5
Hi, could someone point me to where to find ReleaseBuilderDeveloper please? Thanks, ...Stan |
Re: [squeak-dev] 3.10 image
|
|
El 7/15/08 8:58 AM, "stan shepherd" <[hidden email]> escribió: > Hi, could someone point me to where to find ReleaseBuilderDeveloper please? > > Thanks, ...Stan I take the Ramon cleanup and adapt to Release Builder. Also I suggest made a method , I attach here Edgar |
SmalltalkImage-cleanup.st (2K) |
|
Thanks Edgar, I probably should have posted to beginners. However, I did find: SmalltalkImage current cleanUpAll in Keiths KernelExt package in squeaksource.com/311 which has cleaned up my obsoletes. ...Stan |
«
Return to Squeak - Dev
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |