我正在与一位朋友交谈，比较语言，他提到Java的自动内存管理优于Python，因为Java会压缩，而Python则没有 - 因此对于长期运行的服务器，Python是一个糟糕的选择。
没有进入哪个更好或更糟，他的主张是否正确 - CPython的垃圾收集器不是紧凑的内存，因此，长时间运行的Python进程会随着时间的推移变得越来越分散吗？
我知道运行CPython的垃圾收集器是可选的。 大多数情况下，它使用自动引用计数进行自动内存管理，一旦引用计数达到零，就会释放对象 - 因此，在释放对象方面，CPython的垃圾收集器唯一需要的是检测没有的循环。根集中的对象具有引用。 但我不知道除此之外是否进行任何压实的细节。
如果没有，那么长期运行的CPython进程如何解决内存碎片问题？
I was talking with a friend, comparing languages, and he mentioned that Java's automated memory management is superior to Python's as Java's does compaction, while Python's does not - and hence for long-running servers, Python is a poor choice.
Without getting into which is better or worse, is his claim true - does CPython's garbage collector not compact memory and, thus, long-running Python processes get more and more fragmented over time?
I know that running CPython's garbage collector is optional. Mostly it uses automated reference counting for automated memory management, and as soon as a reference count hits zero, the object is freed - thus the only thing that CPython's garbage collector is needed for, in terms of freeing objects, is to detect cycles which no object in the root set has a reference to. But I don't know the details of whether it does any compaction in addition to that.
If it does not, then how do long-running CPython processes address the memory fragmentation issue?
最满意答案
我不确定，但CPython使用引用计数 ，它的对象使用内存地址作为id，所以我会说它不做压缩...而且根据这个 ，“[C] Python不使用内存压缩.. 。[] Python应该使用内存压缩，实现C扩展会更加繁琐且容易出错，并且会有更少的扩展 - 限制使用Python的域。“
I don't know for sure, but CPython uses reference counting and its objects use memory addresses as ids so I would say it does not do compaction... And according to this, "[C]Python does not use memory compaction ... [w]ould Python use memory compaction, implementing C extensions would be much more tedious and error prone and there would be less such extensions - limiting the domain where Python is used."
更多推荐
发布评论