3 ms·

So does this mean Shenandoah is not suitable for things like caching? Should this even mean I should avoid trying to re-use objects if possible?

• unlogic 8y ago
  Completely vice-versa, Shenandoah is much better for caching because it is NOT generational. [LRU] Caches go against generational hypothesis because the oldest elements are evicted first.
  • jashmatthews 8y ago
    I understand what you mean, but wouldn't the majority of allocations still hapen during a request? For example, generational GC works really well with Elixir and Erlang caches.
    • unlogic 8y ago
      > wouldn't the majority of allocations still happen during a request? Could you please clarify this question? Do you mean that if cached objects are a small part of the total allocation rate, then generation GCs work well with that?
      • jashmatthews 8y ago
        Exactly. Go explored a request oriented collector with explicit generational boundaries.
        • unlogic 8y ago
          Well, if caching takes a small part of the overall workload, then you can't really say it's a "cache workload" or "cache-heavy workload", right? My answer meant that Shenandoah would work well in a program where cache occupies like 70-80% of the heap, and generational GCs might not. But surely, neither are going to break from a 1%-heap cache.