Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 24 Jun 1995 09:33:37 -0500
From:      rich@id.slip.bcm.tmc.edu (Rich Murphey)
To:        roberto@blaise.ibp.fr
Cc:        henrich@crh.cl.msu.edu, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Memory leak somewhere?
Message-ID:  <199506241433.JAA03296@id.slip.bcm.tmc.edu>
In-Reply-To: <199506230854.KAA06398@blaise.ibp.fr> (roberto@blaise.ibp.fr)

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
|From: roberto@blaise.ibp.fr (Ollivier Robert)
|
|> suggests perhaps there is a problem with something somewhere in FreeBSD. This
|> behaviour seems to be new with the 0412-SNAP, although I dont have any
|> proof of this.  This is crazy, I have a 32mb machine, and its performing like
|> a dog because of this sort of memory usage (!) :(.  On a 16mb machine, if you
|> run any significant apps you go to swaphell because of the memory usage here.
|> Could this be a leak in the kernel malloc, or mmap code or some such?
|
|Relink the server with either -lgnumalloc or -ldlmalloc (found in
|ports/devel/libdlmalloc). The libc's malloc take as much as two times the
|memory needed per allocation.
|
|I think we should throw away the libc's malloc and adopt another one.
|-- 
|Ollivier ROBERT     -=- The daemon is FREE! -=-     roberto@FreeBSD.ORG
|FreeBSD keltia 2.0-BUILT-19950503 #3: Wed May  3 19:53:04 MET DST 1995

We tried using gnumalloc for XFree86 between 3.0 and 3.1 but
beta testers reported problems with the X servers, so we
switched back to the one in libc.  The malloc in libc is by
far the most stable of the lot.

I don't know that anything has changed in gnumalloc.  Rich



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199506241433.JAA03296>