On 16.12.2006, at 17:29, Vlad Seryakov wrote:
Instead of using threadspeed or other simple malloc/free test, i used
naviserver and Tcl pages as test for allocators.
Using ab from apache and stresstest it for thousand requests i test
several allocators. And
having everything the same except LD_PRELOAD the difference seems
pretty
clear. Hoard/TCmalloc/Ptmalloc2 all
slower than zippy, no doubt. Using threadtest although, tcmalloc was
faster than zippy, but in real life it behaves differently.
So, i would suggest to you to try hit naviserver with nedmalloc. If it
will be always faster than zippy, than you got what you want. Other
thinks to watch, after each test see the size of nsd process.
I will try nedmaloc as well later today
Indeed, the best way is to checkout the real application.
No test program can give you better picture!
As far as this is concerned, I do plan to make this test
but it takes some time! I spend the whole day getting the
nedmalloc compiling OK on all platform that we use
(solaris sparc/x86, mac ppc/x86, linux/x86, win). The next
step is to snap it in the Tcl library and try the real
application...
