There's a jemalloc-cmake repo that has cmake support (I just tested it, and works great with VS 2017 x64). You can find it here: https://github.com/jemalloc/jemalloc-cmake
However, it looks like it's a few versions behind the main jemalloc repo (4.3.1 looks to be the latest version in the jemalloc-cmake repo, while 5.0.1 is in the jemalloc repo). I'm reaching out to some of the committers as to whether there are plans to integrate these changes into the main repo, and I'll report back with what I learn. It seems they do want to support cmake in the main jemalloc repo given this discussion: https://github.com/jemalloc/jemalloc/issues/303 -----Original Message----- From: and...@schwartzmeyer.com [mailto:and...@schwartzmeyer.com] Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2017 11:35 AM To: dev@mesos.apache.org Cc: toenshoff=me....@schwartzmeyer.com; Till Toenshoff <toensh...@me.com> Subject: Re: [Proposal] Use jemalloc as default memory allocator for Mesos I looked at the Windows build a bit closer, and the Cygwin requirement appears to simply be for the use of autogen to generate headers. Once the headers are generated, the rest of the build is driven by a committed Visual Studio 2015 solution, which means that jemalloc can be built natively on Windows using MSVC. It should be possibly to replace autogen with some other tooling in order to generate the required headers. However, this is work we would likely have to do and of course submit upstream. Furthermore, the committed solution itself is a bad idea, as it won't "just work" for Visual Studio 2017. We would want to instead write a CMake build for jemalloc to replace the committed solution upstream, so that VS 2015, 2017, etc. solutions can just be generated. This is what we do for Mesos, and have done for other dependencies such as ZooKeeper. So in summary: it looks like jemalloc is usable on Windows, but it will require further effort to integrate into the build cleanly. On 08/30/2017 6:26 pm, Till Toenshoff wrote: > It appears that jemalloc does support Windows (64bit) > See: > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithu > b.com%2Fjemalloc%2Fjemalloc%2Fblob%2Fdev%2Fmsvc%2FReadMe.txt&data=02%7 > C01%7Cjohnkord%40microsoft.com%7Ca59a5339a3514ad65d6508d4f09f0136%7C72 > f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636398013091711993&sdata=8uH6 > e5lX8ZT1VIBq8jK9A3REfUfOUHC%2FRj0GcDSX%2FOY%3D&reserved=0 > <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgith > ub.com%2Fjemalloc%2Fjemalloc%2Fblob%2Fdev%2Fmsvc%2FReadMe.txt&data=02% > 7C01%7Cjohnkord%40microsoft.com%7Ca59a5339a3514ad65d6508d4f09f0136%7C7 > 2f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636398013091711993&sdata=8uH > 6e5lX8ZT1VIBq8jK9A3REfUfOUHC%2FRj0GcDSX%2FOY%3D&reserved=0> > > tcmalloc on the other hand appears to only offer a minimal variant on > Windows. > See: > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithu > b.com%2Fgperftools%2Fgperftools&data=02%7C01%7Cjohnkord%40microsoft.co > m%7Ca59a5339a3514ad65d6508d4f09f0136%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db4 > 7%7C1%7C0%7C636398013091711993&sdata=DAZLSajdGete70eJrqe46Aaf%2FV4oKBa > KNHfwciRo0R4%3D&reserved=0 > <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgith > ub.com%2Fgperftools%2Fgperftools&data=02%7C01%7Cjohnkord%40microsoft.com%7Ca59a5339a3514ad65d6508d4f09f0136%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636398013091711993&sdata=DAZLSajdGete70eJrqe46Aaf%2FV4oKBaKNHfwciRo0R4%3D&reserved=0> > - grep for "COMPILING ON NON-LINUX SYSTEMS” > See: > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithu > b.com%2Fgperftools%2Fgperftools%2Fblob%2Fmaster%2FINSTALL&data=02%7C01 > %7Cjohnkord%40microsoft.com%7Ca59a5339a3514ad65d6508d4f09f0136%7C72f98 > 8bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636398013091711993&sdata=4dnlI5Z > NaVq%2By%2BvJngZ7zRiSHBrwEiI8ieaIanG1xVo%3D&reserved=0 > <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgith > ub.com%2Fgperftools%2Fgperftools%2Fblob%2Fmaster%2FINSTALL&data=02%7C01%7Cjohnkord%40microsoft.com%7Ca59a5339a3514ad65d6508d4f09f0136%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636398013091711993&sdata=4dnlI5ZNaVq%2By%2BvJngZ7zRiSHBrwEiI8ieaIanG1xVo%3D&reserved=0> > - grep for “Windows (MSVC, Cygwin, and MinGW)" > > So both options rely on Cygwin or MinGW for building - a requirement > that the Mesos build itself does not have and proves your point of > stuff not really “just working” at least when it comes to the build > step of those packages. > > Seems that without trying it, we won’t find out if jemalloc works as > hoped on Windows for us - the Firefox project results however are > encouraging. On the other hand, if it doesn’t work, we could simply > decide to disable it on Windows just like some other Mesos features > will remain disabled on that platform unless someone decides to port > them - e.g. SASL based authn. > >> On Aug 25, 2017, at 3:28 PM, Benno Evers <bev...@mesosphere.com> >> wrote: >> >> Hi Jeff, >> >> from looking around on the internet, it seems like Firefox builds >> with jemalloc on all platforms, and I've also seen reports of people >> successfully using tcmalloc heap profiling on windows. I'm afraid I >> don't currently have a Windows machine with development environment >> set up, so I can't provide direct user experience. >> >> In the worst case, we would have to disable jemalloc-support on >> windows, but I hope it won't be necessary. >> >> Since you probably have more experience with memory management on >> windows, is there a reason to suspect that it should or shouldn't >> work? >> >> Best regards, >> Benno >> >> On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 6:16 PM, Jeff Coffler < >> jeff.coff...@microsoft.com.invalid> wrote: >> >>> Hi Benno, >>> >>> What's the availability of both jemalloc and tcmalloc on the Windows >>> platform? Do the products work there properly? >>> >>> There are solutions that I know work on Windows (from past work I've >>> done). I'm unsure about either jemalloc and tcmalloc, however. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> /Jeff >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Benno Evers [mailto:bev...@mesosphere.com] >>> Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2017 3:16 AM >>> To: dev@mesos.apache.org >>> Subject: Re: [Proposal] Use jemalloc as default memory allocator for >>> Mesos >>> >>> Hi Alexander, >>> >>> in general, jemalloc and tcmalloc are very similar, and seem to be >>> taking ideas from each other (in fact the jeprof executable started >>> as a copy of pprof and there are still references the pprof >>> documentation in some >>> comments) >>> >>> From what I've seen, the main difference is that the profiling seems >>> better-suited to multi-threaded programs, in particular the profile >>> file format includes per-thread memory statistics and the profiling >>> features can be turned on and off individually per thread. From an >>> API perspective, all settings can be accessed by the mallctl() >>> function, while it seems that tcmalloc requires some options to be >>> set by environment variable ( >>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= >>> https%3A%2F%2Fgperftools.github.io%2Fgperftools% >>> 2Fheapprofile.html&data=02%7C01%7CJeff.Coffler%40microsoft.com% >>> 7Ccb0bfb1eb3e242c0dd4108d4e946d709%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011 >>> db47%7C1%7C0%7C636389937852256730&sdata=IQeb2% >>> 2BpcrWRQ8yvdTgOEHfyplgC36dy73nnXswdPamo%3D&reserved=0). Finally, I >>> also found the documentation to be more thorough. >>> >>> But again, the two are very similar, so I think the main decision >>> here isn't whether to choose jemalloc or tcmalloc but whether to >>> switch to a custom memory allocator that has support for profiling >>> heap memory usage. >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 4:26 PM, Alexander Rojas >>> <alexan...@mesosphere.io> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Benno, >>>> >>>> This does sound like a great addition to Mesos. Can you however >>>> explain how jemalloc is better than tcmalloc? I think that for such >>>> important change, we probably need some more information. >>>> >>>> Your comment in MESOS-7876 mentions that we already have tcmalloc >>>> since it is part of gperftools, so I would like to have a whole >>>> picture of the advantages and disadvantages of both options. >>>> >>>> Alexander Rojas >>>> alexan...@mesosphere.io >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On 18. Aug 2017, at 12:49, Benno Evers <bev...@mesosphere.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> I would like to propose bundling jemalloc as a new dependency >>>>> under `3rdparty/`, and to link Mesos against this new memory >>>>> allocator by default. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> # Motivation >>>>> >>>>> The Mesos master and agent binaries are, ideally, very >>>>> long-running processes. This makes them susceptible to memory >>>>> issues, because even small leaks have a chance to build up over >>>>> time to the point where they become problematic. >>>>> >>>>> We have seen several such issues on our internal Mesos >>>>> installations, for example >>>>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi >>>>> ss >>>>> ues.apache.org%2Fjira%2Fbrowse%2FMESOS-7748&data=02%7C01%7CJeff.Co >>>>> ff >>>>> ler%40microsoft.com%7Ccb0bfb1eb3e242c0dd4108d4e946d709%7C72f988bf8 >>>>> 6f >>>>> 141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636389937852266742&sdata=L016YGyEk >>>>> K5 >>>>> 0WtvhgSNS%2FT5ntkkd9qINorRI2Utp5lk%3D&reserved=0 >>>>> or https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= >>> https%3A%2F%2Fissues.apache.org%2Fjira%2Fbrowse%2FMESOS- >>> 7800&data=02%7C01%7CJeff.Coffler%40microsoft.com% >>> 7Ccb0bfb1eb3e242c0dd4108d4e946d709%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011 >>> db47%7C1%7C0%7C636389937852266742&sdata=IrzDO6o1VL9a8eGJIW3jKbWXk6U4 >>> fH >>> Fn3Xbn4po1r3c%3D&reserved=0. >>>>> >>>>> I imagine any organization running Mesos for an extended period of >>>>> time has had its share of similar issues, so I expect this >>>>> proposal to be useful for the whole community. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> # Why jemalloc? >>>>> >>>>> Given that memory issues tend to be most visible after a given >>>>> process has been running for a long time, it would be great to >>>>> have the option to enable heap tracking and profiling at runtime, >>>>> without having to restart the process. (This ability could then be >>>>> connected to a Mesos endpoint, similar to how we can adjust the >>>>> log level at >>>>> runtime) >>>>> >>>>> The two production-quality memory allocators that have this >>>>> ability currently seem to be tcmalloc and jemalloc. Of these, >>>>> jemalloc does produce in our experience better and more detailed >>>>> statistics. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> # What is the impact on users who do not need this feature? >>>>> >>>>> Naturally, not every single user of Mesos will have a need for >>>>> this feature. To ensure these users would not experience serious >>>>> performance regressions as a result of this change, we conducted a >>>>> preliminary set of benchmarks whose results are collected under >>>>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi >>>>> ss >>>>> ues.apache.org%2Fjira%2Fbrowse%2FMESOS-7876&data=02%7C01%7CJeff.Co >>>>> ff >>>>> ler%40microsoft.com%7Ccb0bfb1eb3e242c0dd4108d4e946d709%7C72f988bf8 >>>>> 6f >>>>> 141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636389937852266742&sdata=RsZcAGuFm >>>>> %2 >>>>> Bw2PPLgMql%2B9vVgkFQrZZFJYdPGcBODsCU%3D&reserved=0 >>>>> >>>>> It turns out that we could probably even expect a small speedup >>>>> (1% >>>>> - 5%) as a nice side-effect of this change. >>>>> >>>>> Users who compile Mesos themselves would of course have the option >>>>> to disable jemalloc at configuration time or replace it with their >>>>> memory allocator of choice. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I'm looking forward to hear any thoughts and comments. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> -- >>>>> Benno Evers >>>>> Software Engineer, Mesosphere >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Benno Evers >>> Software Engineer, Mesosphere >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Benno Evers >> Software Engineer, Mesosphere
