Subject: Re: Thread benchmarks, round 2
To: matthew sporleder <email@example.com>
From: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org>
Date: 10/05/2007 20:28:38
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 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)
My opinion is that this is a problem for the Linux and glibc developers
to solve :-)