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
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
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
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
] 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
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
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
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
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
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
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},
{
11 matches
Mail list logo