Re: kmem-pool-uvm

[Lars Heidieker <lars.heidieker%googlemail.com@localhost>]

On Aug 16, 2011, at 11:37 PM, David Brownlee wrote:

> On 16 August 2011 21:19, Lars Heidieker <lars%heidieker.de@localhost> wrote:
>> Real world benchmark is almost the same.
>> a release build eg
>> 
>>                real            user            system
>> current:        2735            8422            1390
>> vmem-heap:      2716            8419            1383
>> 
>> variations between runs are easily larger then this.
> 
> Would the benchmark be expected to show any difference in a high
> memory pressure situation?

I don't expect much of a difference except for the fact that there should be no 
failed allocations with the changes, so performance wise probably a slight edge 
for the vmem solution...