Date: Sat, 24 Jun 1995 09:33:37 -0500 From: rich@id.slip.bcm.tmc.edu (Rich Murphey) To: roberto@blaise.ibp.fr Cc: henrich@crh.cl.msu.edu, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Memory leak somewhere? Message-ID: <199506241433.JAA03296@id.slip.bcm.tmc.edu> In-Reply-To: <199506230854.KAA06398@blaise.ibp.fr> (roberto@blaise.ibp.fr)
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
|From: roberto@blaise.ibp.fr (Ollivier Robert) | |> suggests perhaps there is a problem with something somewhere in FreeBSD. This |> behaviour seems to be new with the 0412-SNAP, although I dont have any |> proof of this. This is crazy, I have a 32mb machine, and its performing like |> a dog because of this sort of memory usage (!) :(. On a 16mb machine, if you |> run any significant apps you go to swaphell because of the memory usage here. |> Could this be a leak in the kernel malloc, or mmap code or some such? | |Relink the server with either -lgnumalloc or -ldlmalloc (found in |ports/devel/libdlmalloc). The libc's malloc take as much as two times the |memory needed per allocation. | |I think we should throw away the libc's malloc and adopt another one. |-- |Ollivier ROBERT -=- The daemon is FREE! -=- roberto@FreeBSD.ORG |FreeBSD keltia 2.0-BUILT-19950503 #3: Wed May 3 19:53:04 MET DST 1995 We tried using gnumalloc for XFree86 between 3.0 and 3.1 but beta testers reported problems with the X servers, so we switched back to the one in libc. The malloc in libc is by far the most stable of the lot. I don't know that anything has changed in gnumalloc. Rich
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199506241433.JAA03296>