>>>>> On Sat, 11 Jan 2003 22:31:42 +0000, Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sat, Jan 11, 2003 at 11:17:57PM +0100, Andreas J. Koenig wrote: >> And it reminds me on my postings to p5p about glibc being very buggy >> up to 2.3 (posted during last October). I came to the conclusion that >> perl cannot be benchmarked at all with glibc before v2.3. > I remember your posting, but not the details. Did it relate to glibc's malloc > and how long it took to free things? Yes. > If so, surely benchmarking using perl's malloc would work with > earlier glibc's? I saw the erratic speed behaviour with 2.2.3, 2.2.4, and 2.2.5 and didn't test earlier ones. glibc 2.3 had malloc rewritten from scratch and with my limited testing it seemed to have this problem fixed. > Anyway, on the two Debian systems I tested: > nick@penfold:~/5.8.0-i-g/t$ ls -l /lib/libc.so.6 > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 13 Jan 2 08:46 /lib/libc.so.6 -> libc-2.3.1.so > nick@mirth:~$ ls -l /lib/libc.so.6 > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 13 Jan 7 16:20 /lib/libc.so.6 -> libc-2.3.1.so > And (obviously) the FreeBSD has BSD's libc > Thanks for the reminder. It's only good luck that I (well Richard) had 2.3.1 > on them. Well, then my findings don't solve the puzzle. -- andreas
