Subject: Re: Thread benchmarks, round 2
To: matthew sporleder <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Adam Hamsik <email@example.com>
Date: 10/05/2007 16:35:26
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Oct 5, 2007, at 3:18 PM, matthew sporleder wrote:
> On 10/5/07, Kris Kennaway <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> Andrew Doran wrote:
>>> So, I learned a few things since I put up the previous set of
>>> - The erratic behaviour from Linux is due to the glibc memory
>>> 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
>> 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)
Did you mean hoard memory allocator?
Proud NetBSD user.
We program to have fun.
Even when we program for money, we want to have fun as well.
~ Yukihiro Matsumoto
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----