Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 13:27:42 -0700 From: Jason Evans <jasone@FreeBSD.org> To: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> Cc: Krassimir Slavchev <krassi@bulinfo.net>, Paul Allen <nospam@ugcs.caltech.edu>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: memory leak in free() Message-ID: <4490713E.2050107@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20060614184026.GC86300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> References: <448FC3AF.9060606@bulinfo.net> <449048C7.6090109@FreeBSD.org> <20060614175352.GI28128@groat.ugcs.caltech.edu> <200606141358.47527.jhb@freebsd.org> <20060614184026.GC86300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Kostik Belousov wrote: > On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 01:58:46PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: >>And any such patch would have to have a knob that defaulted to keeping >>overcommit on anyway. :-) > > Ha ! Exactly. My patch has such knob :). > Shameless plug: http://kostikbel.narod.ru/overcommit > > Testing the patch on recent CURRENT, I did notice that jemalloc > really likes the swap :). You're saying that jemalloc uses a lot of *reserved* swap space, right? That's different than actually causing a lot of swapping, and something that is of no concern, IMO. Jason
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4490713E.2050107>