Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2012 09:10:19 -0800 From: Jason Evans <jasone@freebsd.org> To: Tim Kientzle <tim@kientzle.com> Cc: Ian Lepore <freebsd@damnhippie.dyndns.org>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: jemalloc enhancement for small-memory systems Message-ID: <2698981A-EA71-41BD-A9B3-FCD130EB3832@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <75ECE5AB-9276-44BA-84D7-56EF6BDC3984@kientzle.com> References: <1356204505.1129.21.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> <75ECE5AB-9276-44BA-84D7-56EF6BDC3984@kientzle.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Dec 22, 2012, at 2:40 PM, Tim Kientzle <tim@kientzle.com> wrote: > Would it be feasible for jemalloc to initially allocate > small blocks (to not over-allocate for small programs and > systems with small RAM) and then allocate successively > larger blocks as the program requires more memory? All chunks must be the same size in jemalloc, so it's not possible to = increase chunk size over the lifetime of an application. As Ian said, = chunk size isn't a major factor in physical memory usage unless = mlockall(2) enters the picture. Jason=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?2698981A-EA71-41BD-A9B3-FCD130EB3832>