Re: [AOLSERVER] AOLserver 4.0(.10) memory usage

2006-06-05 Thread Jeff Hobbs
Dossy Shiobara wrote: On 2006.06.02, Jeff Hobbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm of course interested in seeing whatever variants of the threaded malloc that are done. The original was also provided (with thanks) by the folks at AOL, designed on the original mods to threaded Tcl and high

Re: [AOLSERVER] AOLserver 4.0(.10) memory usage

2006-06-04 Thread Nathan Folkman
The new code has been committed to the AOLserver project on SourceForge as the top-level zippy2 module: http://aolserver.cvs.sourceforge.net/aolserver/zippy2 Enjoy! - n [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Folks, Nate and I spent a lot of time -- frankly, far too much time -- chasing this down a

Re: [AOLSERVER] AOLserver 4.0(.10) memory usage

2006-06-04 Thread Nathan Folkman
See previous note to AOLserver listserv as I just committed the code... Might be some stuff of interest that would make sense to move back into the core. I'd also like to see modifications made to Tcl to make it much easier to plug in alternate allocators (Hoard, tcmalloc, etc.) where using

Re: [AOLSERVER] AOLserver 4.0(.10) memory usage

2006-06-03 Thread Andrew Piskorski
On Fri, Jun 02, 2006 at 10:28:06AM -0700, Jeff Rogers wrote: I think one difference is in the tcl version itself; the latest versions use a fast multithreaded allocator that allocates on average slightly more than double the amount requestes, while earlier versions may have been more

Re: [AOLSERVER] AOLserver 4.0(.10) memory usage

2006-06-03 Thread Thor Johnson
] AOLserver 4.0(.10) memory usage On Fri, Jun 02, 2006 at 10:28:06AM -0700, Jeff Rogers wrote: I think one difference is in the tcl version itself; the latest versions use a fast multithreaded allocator that allocates on average slightly more than double the amount requestes, while earlier

[AOLSERVER] AOLserver 4.0(.10) memory usage

2006-06-02 Thread Guan Yang
Hi, A couple of weeks ago I moved a number of servers to AOLserver 4.0.10 from various versions of 3.4 because of the 10^9 seconds problem. After the move servers that were preivously using 100-120 MB of memory are now using around 300 MB to 400 MB each. I've tried to turn off or reduce

Re: [AOLSERVER] AOLserver 4.0(.10) memory usage

2006-06-02 Thread Jeff Rogers
I think one difference is in the tcl version itself; the latest versions use a fast multithreaded allocator that allocates on average slightly more than double the amount requestes, while earlier versions may have been more frugal. You can cut your memory usage by a third or more by

Re: [AOLSERVER] AOLserver 4.0(.10) memory usage

2006-06-02 Thread Guan Yang
Thanks, What values would you suggest for NBUCKETS and MAXALLOC? And looking at tclThreadAlloc.c, I'm not quite sure how to make the spacing closer. Guan On 2 Jun 2006, at 19:28 , Jeff Rogers wrote: I think one difference is in the tcl version itself; the latest versions use a fast

Re: [AOLSERVER] AOLserver 4.0(.10) memory usage

2006-06-02 Thread Jim Davidson
Folks, Nate and I spent a lot of time -- frankly, far too much time -- chasing this down a few months back. We ended up completely re- writing the multi-threaded allocator with features to reclaim memory, fix stats counters which in the current code are broken and lie, and added an alloc

Re: [AOLSERVER] AOLserver 4.0(.10) memory usage

2006-06-02 Thread Dossy Shiobara
On 2006.06.02, Jeff Hobbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm of course interested in seeing whatever variants of the threaded malloc that are done. The original was also provided (with thanks) by the folks at AOL, designed on the original mods to threaded Tcl and high perf malloc for it. If this

Re: [AOLSERVER] AOLserver 4.0(.10) memory usage

2006-06-02 Thread Jeff Rogers
Guan Yang wrote: Thanks, What values would you suggest for NBUCKETS and MAXALLOC? And looking at tclThreadAlloc.c, I'm not quite sure how to make the spacing closer. Guan The original list is { 16, 1024, 512, NULL}, { 32, 512, 256, NULL}, { 64, 256, 128, NULL}, {