Lunatic's process size is a bit higher than Erlang's when a process is spawned. It's around 4KiB for the stack, if you don't use any heap data. On modern 64bit CPUs Lunatic will relay mostly on cheap virtual memory. The actual memory consumption during runtime should be lower than Erlang's in most cases just from the fact that Rust's data structures are more compact and memory efficient. This is something that can be optimised further if it ever becomes a bottleneck. Right now the development is focused on stability and correctness before performance.
If I had money to invest in things, then you would've just made an angel investor out of me. As I'm quick to say, I have never told someone, "I don't want it done right, I want it done fast!"
Also, this post has made me realize I've been too liberal in rating things as unicorns, because you, sir, are building a flerfing unicorn. My hats — all of my hats — off to you. 🎩🧢👒🎓⛑🪖👑
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Lunatic's process size is a bit higher than Erlang's when a process is spawned. It's around 4KiB for the stack, if you don't use any heap data. On modern 64bit CPUs Lunatic will relay mostly on cheap virtual memory. The actual memory consumption during runtime should be lower than Erlang's in most cases just from the fact that Rust's data structures are more compact and memory efficient. This is something that can be optimised further if it ever becomes a bottleneck. Right now the development is focused on stability and correctness before performance.
If I had money to invest in things, then you would've just made an angel investor out of me. As I'm quick to say, I have never told someone, "I don't want it done right, I want it done fast!"
Also, this post has made me realize I've been too liberal in rating things as unicorns, because you, sir, are building a flerfing unicorn. My hats — all of my hats — off to you. 🎩🧢👒🎓⛑🪖👑