Subject: Re: Thread benchmarks, round 2
To: Kris Kennaway <email@example.com>
From: matthew sporleder <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/05/2007 09:18:28
On 10/5/07, Kris Kennaway <email@example.com> wrote:
> Andrew Doran wrote:
> > So, I learned a few things since I put up the previous set of benchmarks:
> > - The erratic behaviour from Linux is due to the glibc memory allocator.
> > Using Google's tcmalloc, the problem disappears.
> Well you have to be careful there, tcmalloc apparently defers frees, and
> is not really a general purpose malloc. The linux performance problems
> are (were? I haven't tried recent kernels) real though.
I don't want to get too into linux tuning for this, but horde is a
good alternative to tcmalloc if there are concerns about using
tcmalloc in this capacity. (horde also works on solaris, and could
probably be ported further)