On Fri, 2 Jun 2017 12:31:19 -0700 Larry Hastings <la...@hastings.org> wrote: > > Anyway, I'm not super excited by the prospect of using obmalloc for > larger objects. There's an inverse relation between the size of > allocation and the frequency of allocation. In Python there are lots of > tiny allocations, but fewer and fewer as the size increases. (A > similarly-shaped graph to what retailers call the "long tail".) By no > small coincidence, obmalloc is great at small objects, which is where we > needed the help most. Let's leave it at that.
+1 to that and nice explanation. > A more fruitful endeavor might be to try one of these fancy new > third-party allocators in CPython, e.g. tcmalloc, jemalloc. Try each > with both obmalloc turned on and turned off, and see what happens to > performance and memory usage. (I'd try it myself, but I'm already so > far behind on watching funny cat videos.) We should lobby for a ban on funny cat videos so that you spend more time on CPython. Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
