From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Oct 23 11:57: 8 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39F8037B401 for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2002 11:57:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BE3F43E4A for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2002 11:57:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id g9NIuxn4044585; Wed, 23 Oct 2002 20:56:59 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) To: David Schultz Cc: Danny Braniss , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: malloc In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 23 Oct 2002 11:50:24 PDT." <20021023185024.GA468@HAL9000.homeunix.com> Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 20:56:59 +0200 Message-ID: <44584.1035399419@critter.freebsd.dk> From: Poul-Henning Kamp Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message <20021023185024.GA468@HAL9000.homeunix.com>, David Schultz writes: >Thus spake Poul-Henning Kamp : >> In message <20021023165929.GA7863@HAL9000.homeunix.com>, David Schultz writes: >> >> >You can find a somewhat more thorough comparison of malloc >> >implementations at http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/440671.html . >> >> There are many problems with this paper, and my feeling is that it was >> written with a very specific purpose in mind, although I havn't been >> able to figure out just what that purpose was. > >I did say `somewhat', didn't I? ;-) As I mentioned in the part of >my message that you didn't quote, I don't much care for the paper >either, but it's the only half-reasonable comparison I know of. >I don't think the authors know what they're talking about, but they >did collect extensive data for some real world programs, which I >assume is valid. Right, and their study of the correlation between number of bugs on the windshield versus price-tag is scientifically rigorous and highly commendable. You just can't conclude anything useful from it :-) >I agree that the behavior of the program from the point of view of >the VM system is the most important metric. But internal and >external fragmentation are also significant issues. Often, these >are a result of programmers not understanding how their malloc >works. For example, programs that make numerous 2K allocations in >phkmalloc will get twice the amount of memory they asked for, and >since each chunk is page-aligned, it will be twice as bad for the >VM system. Not if they are 2k allocations, but if they are 2k+1 allocations: yes. >A harder problem to solve is fragmentation for long-running >servers, where the RSS tends to creep upwards over time as virtual >memory fills with holes. This is where you want to run phkmalloc with the 'H' option. It practically makes it a non-issue last I tried. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message