Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 30 Oct 2012 08:47:45 -0600
From:      Ian Lepore <freebsd@damnhippie.dyndns.org>
To:        Fabian Keil <freebsd-listen@fabiankeil.de>
Cc:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Karl Pielorz <kpielorz_lst@tdx.co.uk>
Subject:   Re: Threaded 6.4 code compiled under 9.0 uses a lot more memory?..
Message-ID:  <1351608465.1120.30.camel@revolution.hippie.lan>
In-Reply-To: <20121030134614.1a42f0e3@fabiankeil.de>
References:  <A92CE63E6E6DB93B366F4A42@MightyAtom.tdx.co.uk> <20121030134614.1a42f0e3@fabiankeil.de>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 2012-10-30 at 13:46 +0100, Fabian Keil wrote:
> Karl Pielorz <kpielorz_lst@tdx.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> > Can anyone think of any quick pointers as to why some code originally 
> > written under 6.4 amd64 - when re-compiled under 9.0-stable amd64 takes
> > up a *lot* more memory when running?
> 
> 6.4 comes with phkmalloc while 9.0 uses jemalloc. Maybe you are
> allocating memory in a way that is less space-efficiently handled by
> jemalloc's default configuration.
> 
> Fabian

jemalloc is certainly the first thing that came to my mind.  Does
MALLOC_PRODUCTION need to be defined on a 9.0 system, or is that
something that gets turned on automatically in an official release
build? (I'm always working with non-release stuff so I'm not sure how
that gets handled).

-- Ian





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1351608465.1120.30.camel>