Bernd Zeimetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> What's the downsides? I'd guess that if it's GPLed and not in glibc, >> there's a catch somehow.
glibc is not GPL'd. It's LGPL. > there're also the google perftools[1], which are suppsed to work very > well and we have libgoogle-perftools in Debian. Hoard is noticably better for OpenLDAP's load profile than Google perftools (although both of them annihilate the glibc allocator). > [2] is very interesting to read in this case. I'd be really interested > to know why one of those implementations is not the default in glibc, > and if hoard or perftools provides the better/faster malloc. > [1] http://sourceforge.net/projects/goog-perftools/ > [2] http://bugs.mysql.com/bug.php?id=27063 Well, I don't know if this is a full explanation, but at least Hoard would have to be relicensed to LGPL to be included in glibc. It's also written in C++, which I expect would be a problem. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
