On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 10:42:08PM -0800, David Greenman wrote: > >On Thu, Mar 14, 2002 at 12:47:29PM +0700, John Indra wrote: > > > >> And to clarify things... I don't know what's wrong with malloc() in -CURRENT > >> and -STABLE (and I don't even know whether it's even "wrong"). All I want is > >> to let the Perl maintainer in -CURRENT and -STABLE to compile the stock Perl > >> with its own malloc library, thus Perl in FreeBSD doesn't suffer from this > >> kind of slowness. > > > >phkmalloc is generally pretty efficient..how do you know that > >switching to the perl internal malloc to optimize this particular > >usage pattern won't severely pessimize others? > > If you read the bug report, you'll see that using perl's malloc results in > the program running more than 10 times faster.
Yah, that program..phk seems to be saying that he believes the malloc usage pattern is atypical for applications in general, so it's conceivable that there are also other common usage patterns within perl which would be optimized by phkmalloc and not by the internal malloc. It should be benchmarked more thoroughly before the switch is made; there's only one datapoint at the moment, which isn't enough to decide whether it's a net win. Kris
Description: PGP signature