From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 17 21:09:12 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2931016A420 for ; Fri, 17 Feb 2006 21:09:12 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from leimy2k@gmail.com) Received: from nproxy.gmail.com (nproxy.gmail.com [64.233.182.198]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 583A443D75 for ; Fri, 17 Feb 2006 21:09:02 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from leimy2k@gmail.com) Received: by nproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id y38so331961nfb for ; Fri, 17 Feb 2006 13:09:01 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=jI8M2RfcXrdz/BlE+X9yONag27VZbi9Eg7HPKYu0kxCPRXhzADHcPMA5ViYKpycoY3xUNq4KgYhMIKyfZ/4edPaoGIYbJKnl87OYqnci+VPBAvYRuDGI53S9gtKwzCCYrSXgR56tAedPbnwGjOkLdPDI6kvyp6zlP/ryGPWb0OE= Received: by 10.48.127.15 with SMTP id z15mr552823nfc; Fri, 17 Feb 2006 13:09:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.49.63.19 with HTTP; Fri, 17 Feb 2006 13:09:00 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3e1162e60602171309w4e0acf87h40c92733d38aef66@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 13:09:00 -0800 From: David Leimbach To: "Brian K. White" In-Reply-To: <008101c63402$de029d10$6c00000a@venti> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <20060215024339.N22450@atlantis.atlantis.dp.ua> <43F29BF5.4060300@freebsd.org> <20060216123548.GA35910@uk.tiscali.com> <20060216135138.GA16669@flame.pc> <43F525A6.3080701@rogers.com> <20060217013039.GA31540@xor.obsecurity.org> <43F6174A.7060801@rogers.com> <008101c63402$de029d10$6c00000a@venti> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Virtual memory consumption (both user and kernel) inmodern CURRENT X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 21:09:12 -0000 On 2/17/06, Brian K. White wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mike Jakubik" > To: "Kris Kennaway" > Cc: "Giorgos Keramidas" ; "Dmitry Pryanishnikov= " > ; ; "David Xu" > ; "Brian Candler" > Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 1:34 PM > Subject: Re: Virtual memory consumption (both user and kernel) inmodern > CURRENT > > > > Kris Kennaway wrote: > >> On Thu, Feb 16, 2006 at 08:23:50PM -0500, Mike Jakubik wrote: > >> > >>> And what am i trading off here? I have "/etc/malloc.conf@ -> ajz" and= my > >>> memory usage has gone up the roof. My system used to be swap free, an= d > >>> now its swapping over 40 MB. Can someone explain to me why this new > >>> malloc is better? I don't see any speed improvements. > >>> > >> > >> It's a couple of orders of magnitude faster for threaded binaries. > >> See earlier posts by the author for extensive discussion. > >> > > > > Great, too bad only 2% of my applications are threaded. I just don't se= e > > this change very positively, using 40MB of swap, where before was none > > does not seem to me like a speed improvement. I'm all for better > > performance of threaded apps, but the trade off seems too high. > > Especially if: What's orders of magnitude faster, the main parts of the a= pp > or merely the act of spawning/destroying a new thread? Logically, since this is a malloc implementation one could infer that it's "malloc" and "free" that end up orders of magnitude faster due to less locking and dedicated per-thread memory arenas. At least that's my deduction. I hope I'm correct :). Dave