public inbox for glibc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "tom at atoptech dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: glibc-bugs@sources.redhat.com
Subject: [Bug libc/11044] malloc dynamic mmap threshold causes 50%-100% increase in memory usage
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2010 17:09:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100407170920.14248.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091202183137.11044.tom@atoptech.com>


------- Additional Comments From tom at atoptech dot com  2010-04-07 17:09 -------
Ulrich,

I filed this bug to show, at least for our application, this change did not
result in improved performance. To the contrary, this change increase memory
fragmentation and in some case, memory usage when from 32GB to 64GB when running
our application. Our application ran fine on RedHat release 3 and 4. When we
ported to release 5, memory usage increased with out reason. From our standpoint
we would like the compute platform to be stable from one release to the next.

All I wanted to point out was that after reading the patch comments for this
change, such as,

+  The threshold goes up in value when the application frees memory that was
+  allocated with the mmap allocator. The idea is that once the application
+  starts freeing memory of a certain size, it's highly probable that this is
+  a size the application uses for transient allocations. This estimator
+  is there to satisfy the new third requirement. 

seem to me; weakly justifiable. Some applications may exhibit this behavior,
however, our application does not. And if one going to try and dynamically
adjust the mmap threshold, one should keep adjusting the mmap threshold over the
lifetime of the process and not clamp it so early, i.e., based upon the first
free...

Regards,

Tom Geocaris



-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11044

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2010-04-07 17:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-12-02 18:31 [Bug libc/11044] New: " tom at atoptech dot com
2010-04-05  5:08 ` [Bug libc/11044] " drepper at redhat dot com
2010-04-05 16:10 ` tom at atoptech dot com
2010-04-05 18:32 ` drepper at redhat dot com
2010-04-05 18:35 ` drepper at redhat dot com
2010-04-07 17:09 ` tom at atoptech dot com [this message]
     [not found] <bug-11044-131@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
2014-02-16 17:43 ` jackie.rosen at hushmail dot com
2014-05-28 19:46 ` schwab at sourceware dot org
2014-06-30 20:35 ` fweimer at redhat dot com

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20100407170920.14248.qmail@sourceware.org \
    --to=sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org \
    --cc=glibc-bugs@sources.redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).