Take a look at Figure 6, page 9 in the following: http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~yruan/DeBox/debox.pdf
On a 1GHz box with 1GB of memory, we were spending 4-5 milliseconds per mmap call, and that was limiting the throughput of our server on SpecWeb99.
Figure 9 on page 11 shows that just getting rid of the mmap/munmap/mincore calls in this server got us a 50% performance boost on a fairly complicated workload. The SpecWeb99 workload was modeled after several web sites, so this might actually be a performance problem in the real world.
If you look at figure 11, page 12, you'll see that with various improvements, our server's median latency dropped to less than 1ms. An mmap time of several milliseconds would kill that benefit.
-Vivek
David Schultz wrote:
Your idea of using a size-hashed freelist as well as a location-sorted list is appealing in its simplicity. Though it can cause a bit of fragmentation, it gives you constant time lookup. Bonwick's vmem allocator ([1], section 4.4.2 and following), apparently works quite well using this principle.
But regardless of the approach, someone has yet to demonstrate that this is actually a performance problem in the real world. ;-)
[1] http://www.usenix.org/event/usenix01/full_papers/bonwick/ _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
_______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
