ABSTRACT
Garbage collection algorithms are divided into three main categories, namely mark-and-sweep, mark-and-compact, and copying collectors. The collectors in the mark-and-compact category are frequently overlooked, perhaps because they have traditionally been associated with greater cost than collectors in the other categories. Among the compacting collectors, the sliding collector has some advantages in that it preserves the relative age of objects. The main problem with the traditional sliding collector by Haddon and Waite [4] is that building address-forwarding tables is costly. We suggest an improvement to the existing algorithm that reverses the order between building the forwarding table and moving the objects. Our method improves performance of building the table, making the sliding collector a better contestant for young generations of objects (nurseries).
- D. Abuaiadh, Y. Ossia, E. Petrank, and U. Silbershtein. An efficient parallel heap compaction algorithm. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Object-oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications, OOPSLA '04, pages 224--236, New York, NY, USA, 2004. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Cohen and A. Nicolau. Comparison of compacting algorithms for garbage collection. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst., 5(4):532--553, Oct. 1983. Google ScholarDigital Library
- D. A. Fisher. Bounded workspace garbage collection in an address order preserving list processing environment. Inf. Process. Lett., 3(1):29--32, July 1974.Google ScholarCross Ref
- B. K. Haddon and W. M. Waite. A compaction procedure for variable length storage elements. Computer Journal, (10):162--165, Aug. 1967.Google Scholar
- R. Jones, A. Hosking, and E. Moss. The Garbage Collection Handbook: The Art of Automatic Memory Management. Chapman & Hall/CRC, 1st edition, 2011. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Jones and R. Lins. Garbage Collection: Algorithms for Automatic Dynamic Memory Management. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY, USA, 1996. Google ScholarDigital Library
- H. B. M. Jonkers. A fast garbage compaction algorithm. Inf. Process. Lett., 9(1):26--30, July 1979.Google ScholarCross Ref
- H. Kermany and E. Petrank. The compressor: Concurrent, incremental, and parallel compaction. In Proceedings of the 2006 ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, PLDI '06, pages 354--363, New York, NY, USA, 2006. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Marlow and S. Peyton Jones. Multicore garbage collection with local heaps. SIGPLAN Not., 46(11):21--32, June 2011. Google ScholarDigital Library
- F. L. Morris. A time- and space-efficient garbage compaction algorithm. Commun. ACM, 21(8):662--5, 1978. Google ScholarDigital Library
- P. R. Wilson. Uniprocessor garbage collection techniques. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Memory Management, IWMM '92, pages 1--42, London, UK, UK, 1992. Springer-Verlag. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- An Improvement to Sliding Garbage Collection
Recommendations
Improved replication-based incremental garbage collection for embedded systems
ISMM '10We have developed an incremental compacting garbage collector for embedded Java systems. The collector divides the heap into equal sized pages and uses the segregated free lists for fast allocation. Collectors that have such a heap layout have a problem ...
Age-based garbage collection
Modern generational garbage collectors look for garbage among the young objects, because they have high mortality; however, these objects include the very youngest objects, which clearly are still live. We introduce new garbage collection algorithms, ...
Garbage collection for embedded systems
EMSOFT '04: Proceedings of the 4th ACM international conference on Embedded softwareSecurity concerns on embedded devices like cellular phones make Java an extremely attractive technology for providing third-party and user-downloadable functionality. However, garbage collectors have typically required several times the maximum live ...
Comments