Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 12:10:23 +0000 From: Karl Pielorz <kpielorz_lst@tdx.co.uk> To: Jan Mikkelsen <janm@transactionware.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Threaded 6.4 code compiled under 9.0 uses a lot more memory?.. Message-ID: <233A9B7A1632D8758F378A74@MightyAtom.tdx.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <73635E29-D47C-4952-9958-1442970E7A4F@transactionware.com> References: <A92CE63E6E6DB93B366F4A42@MightyAtom.tdx.co.uk> <73635E29-D47C-4952-9958-1442970E7A4F@transactionware.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--On 30 October 2012 22:59 +1100 Jan Mikkelsen <janm@transactionware.com> wrote: >> -O2 -pthread -lc_r >> >> They're now compiled under 9.0-S with just: >> >> -O2 -pthread > > libc_r is a user mode implementation of pthreads, so there is one actual > kernel thread with a stack. You now have ~700 kernel threads on startup. > Per-thread stack allocation will be different, and you could quite easily > explain differences that way. That seems the most fitting explanation so far - aside from seeing if I can cut back on the number of threads, I presume there's no "issue" with having that many kicking around - the RES size is still quite 'small' (still waiting to see if anything is 'leaking') - and if ~700 threads happily ran under user mode pthreads - it should still perform at least 'similarly' with kernel threading? -Karl
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?233A9B7A1632D8758F378A74>