[gclist] Distributed Garbage Collection Revisited 1

[Matthew Fuchs]

Helena,
> 
> I am preparing a camera-ready version for the WDAG96, that I will send to you
> if you are intersted. I would like to get some comments from you.
> 
please send it.

> 
> I think it is not necessary an infinite number of new incoming references
> appear before the distributed trace terminates to not terminate the algorithm.
> We can have a cycle of objects spawning two processes being reachable from a
> root either in one process or in the other. The DGC may never reach a root.
> 

We are definitely not seeing eye-to-eye here.  Could you develop a
scenario with a sequence of messages which shows what you mean?

> >1) A remotely rooted object.  If there are no garbage processes, we
> >can just use this as proof the object is alive. 
> 
> I think the problem I presented does not exist if you consider the objects
>  being remotely
> accessed live. In this case I imagine that the back-search would terminate.
> What would happen when a "grey" object is remoteley accessed?

Think about this.  When can a grey object be accessed, and what does
its being accessed mean, at each point in time?

> Sorry If am thinking to much in an implementation level, but I think that it
> was what is more important now. There are lots of algorithms in DGC
> litterature, without being implemented.
> 
Looks like this is changing.

Matthew