Olga,
I introduce two variables, MTMAXCACHE and MTEXCLUSIVE. If I understand
your point I could combine them into one variable such as
MTMALLOC_OPTIONS in the same manner as UMEM_DEBUG or the undocumented
UMEM_OPTIONS. While we are at it we could also accept other
mallocctl options such as MTCHUNKSIZE, MTINITBUFFER, MTDOUBLEFREE, and
MTDEBUGPATTERN. It is a bit of scope creep but I will poll my
advisers. I personally like opening up libmtmalloc a bit. It would
make performance analysis without source code easier. 

I have to have at least one environment variable because changing
the maximum cache allocation value (MTMAXCACHE) must happen at init.

rick



On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 07:58:24PM +0200, ольга крыжановская wrote:
> DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
>       d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
>       h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to
>       :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
>       bh=W3ykwvI/K+Sj5wLS3sSOMYgiRu404HybSwlP6XAuSmU=;
>       b=UqHjBIJv8oWMrjOJRE6SLHVhluGA1iFQAddEOTnuWqiNJmzDZ9c+zDJvZyu494DSgq
>       7FYvVHcpiakob86zSEjgfnqmnQ+m8i8+5o53N7rDVd7djhIjLwdV3hP5XR+DPfyeFP0A
>       6G2FlXSp+10etF0dJ77pVHiz98gGnoPyv1Nb4=
> DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
>       d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
>       h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
>       :cc:content-type;
>       b=iM5KmsDQnRV2bQQwfvZHqY9zsjh+13Fl8B1KspgI4JQXT9lgnQnzVbEg74aoLHq5dR
>       IqbKmMQy1UBWIasvxNOehuw5cywibXlWkHF5ARxtYsr125Abg3ElB+Dn+QmG49OZOjJ0
>       nbexQuLVPvaYTcVKPQ3c4qlfhOtKFPBqwqJxc=
> In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
> Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 19:58:24 +0200
> Subject: Re: Performance Improvements for libmtmalloc [PSARC/2010/212 
>       FastTrack, timeout 06/15/2010]
> From: ольга крыжановская <[email protected]>
> To: Peter Dennis <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected], rick weisner <[email protected]>
> X-Source-IP: mail-iw0-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]
> X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A090206.4C17BF42.0109,ss=1,fgs=0
> 
> I have a comment: Why do you use 3 environment variables? Environment
> variables are very expensive to use, they significantly increase start
> up time of an application and slow down all applications which use
> getenv() or putenv() if the size of the environment is large. libast
> had the same problem, with bitter and measurable impact on start up
> time, and replaced all the allocator tunable variables into 1 variable
> to improve start up time.
> 
> IMO one environment variable to control the libmtmalloc behaviour
> should be enough.
> 
> Olga
> 
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 7:36 PM, Peter Dennis <[email protected]> wrote:
> > This case times out today but there have been no comments from
> > any PSARC members - any reviewers ?
> >
> > thanks
> > pete
> > _______________________________________________
> > opensolaris-arc mailing list
> > [email protected]
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
>       ,   _                                    _   ,
>      { \/`o;====-    Olga Kryzhanovska   -====;o`\/ }
> .----'-/`-/     [email protected]   \-`\-'----.
>  `'-..-| /       http://twitter.com/fleyta     \ |-..-'`
>       /\/\     Solaris/BSD//C/C++ programmer   /\/\
>       `--`                                      `--`

-- 

Rickey C. Weisner 
Software Development and Performance Specialist 
Principal Software Engineer
Systems Quality Office
Oracle Corporation
cell phone: 615-308-1147
email: [email protected]
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-arc mailing list
[email protected]

Reply via email to