Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 11:49:03 -0800 From: Jason Evans <jasone@freebsd.org> To: Mike Jakubik <mikej@rogers.com> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: Virtual memory consumption (both user and kernel) in modern CURRENT Message-ID: <1091E3C1-1E93-4030-9097-D28C780F9D44@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <43F6174A.7060801@rogers.com> 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>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Feb 17, 2006, at 10:34 AM, Mike Jakubik wrote: > 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, and 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 see 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. Are redzones enabled? (They are turned on by default in CURRENT.) You can check by reading the output from something like: MALLOC_OPTIONS=P ls Keep in mind that they use up substantial extra memory -- 32 bytes per allocation. Unless you have disabled redzones, you should expect much higher memory usage with jemalloc than with phkmalloc. Thanks, Jason
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1091E3C1-1E93-4030-9097-D28C780F9D44>