From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Mar 5 11:06:15 1996 Return-Path: owner-questions Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id LAA15946 for questions-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 11:06:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from labinfo.iet.unipi.it (labinfo.iet.unipi.it [131.114.9.5]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA15930 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 11:06:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (luigi@localhost) by labinfo.iet.unipi.it (8.6.5/8.6.5) id UAA06765 for questions@freebsd.org; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 20:00:19 +0100 From: Luigi Rizzo Message-Id: <199603051900.UAA06765@labinfo.iet.unipi.it> Subject: malloc upgrade. To: questions@freebsd.org Date: Tue, 5 Mar 1996 20:00:19 +0100 (MET) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk I have seen that the malloc in the Feb.96 snap is much less hungry than the one up until 2.1R. In order to get the full advantages, is it enough to rebuild libc.so.X.Y with the new malloc code, or there is more ? Luigi ==================================================================== Luigi Rizzo Dip. di Ingegneria dell'Informazione email: luigi@iet.unipi.it Universita' di Pisa tel: +39-50-568533 via Diotisalvi 2, 56126 PISA (Italy) fax: +39-50-568522 http://www.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/ ====================================================================