On 16.12.2006, at 19:31, Vlad Seryakov wrote:
But if speed is not important to you, you can supply Tcl without
zippy,
then no bloat, system is returned with reasonable speed, at least on
Linux, ptmalloc is not that bad
OK. I think I've reached the peace of mind with all this
alternate
I tried to run this program, it crahses with all allocators on free when
it was allocated in other thread. zippy does it as well, i amnot sure
how Naviserver works then.
#include tcl.h
#define MemAlloc ckalloc
#define MemFree ckfree
int nbuffer = 16384;
int nloops = 5;
int nthreads = 4;
Still, even without the last free and with mutex around it, it core
dumps in free(gPtr) during the loop.
Stephen Deasey wrote:
On 12/18/06, Vlad Seryakov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I tried to run this program, it crahses with all allocators on free when
it was allocated in other thread. zippy
On 12/18/06, Vlad Seryakov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Still, even without the last free and with mutex around it, it core
dumps in free(gPtr) during the loop.
OK. Still doesn't mean your program is bug free :-)
There's a lot of extra stuff going on in your example program that
makes it hard
On 18.12.2006, at 22:08, Stephen Deasey wrote:
Works for me.
I say you can allocate memory in one thread and free it in another.
Nice. Well I can say that nedmalloc works, that is, that small
program runs to end w/o coring when compiled with nedmalloc.
Does this prove anything?
On 18.12.2006, at 19:57, Stephen Deasey wrote:
Are you saying you tested your app on Linux with native malloc and
experienced no fragmentation/bloating?
No. I have seen bloating but less then on zippy. I saw some
bloating and fragmentation on all optimizing allocators I
have tested.
I
I suspect something i am doing wrong, but still it crashes and i do not
see it why
#include tcl.h
#include stdlib.h
#include memory.h
#include unistd.h
#include signal.h
#include pthread.h
#define MemAlloc malloc
#define MemFree free
static int nbuffer = 16384;
static int nloops = 5;
On 12/18/06, Zoran Vasiljevic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 18.12.2006, at 19:57, Stephen Deasey wrote:
One thing I wonder about this is, how do requests average out across
all threads? If you set the conn threads to exit after 10,000
requests, will they all quit at roughly the same time