Comments on: jemalloc now on the trunk http://blog.pavlov.net/2008/02/05/jemalloc-now-on-the-trunk/ Ramblings from the mind of Stuart Parmenter Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:51:52 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: Cory Nelson http://blog.pavlov.net/2008/02/05/jemalloc-now-on-the-trunk/#comment-2852 Cory Nelson Wed, 20 Feb 2008 23:14:18 +0000 http://pavlovdotnet.wordpress.com/?p=458#comment-2852 After playing around with the config string I got it up to about 70% scalability - a good 10% more than Windows' heaps. The tricky thing was that despite being more scalable it performed poorly enough - contention or not - that overall it was still a big loss in throughput. The big perf issue appears to be in arena_purge - increasing the F flag fixed that nicely. Some scalability was lost and memory usage has increased very slightly, but overall performance is now 5-10% better than Windows' heaps. I noticed JE removed lazy free completely from FBSD's CVS, citing performance reasons. I have to agree - I ported it over and it has been a detriment in most ways I tried to use it. After playing around with the config string I got it up to about 70% scalability – a good 10% more than Windows’ heaps. The tricky thing was that despite being more scalable it performed poorly enough – contention or not – that overall it was still a big loss in throughput.

The big perf issue appears to be in arena_purge – increasing the F flag fixed that nicely. Some scalability was lost and memory usage has increased very slightly, but overall performance is now 5-10% better than Windows’ heaps.

I noticed JE removed lazy free completely from FBSD’s CVS, citing performance reasons. I have to agree – I ported it over and it has been a detriment in most ways I tried to use it.

]]> By: Friendly_GUI http://blog.pavlov.net/2008/02/05/jemalloc-now-on-the-trunk/#comment-2847 Friendly_GUI Thu, 14 Feb 2008 04:44:25 +0000 http://pavlovdotnet.wordpress.com/?p=458#comment-2847 Could somebody post a recommended testing procedures so we can compare the performance difference? A bookmark file and program to use etc... Thanks Could somebody post a recommended testing procedures so we can compare the performance difference?

A bookmark file and program to use etc…

Thanks

]]> By: Matt Doran http://blog.pavlov.net/2008/02/05/jemalloc-now-on-the-trunk/#comment-2845 Matt Doran Tue, 12 Feb 2008 11:26:37 +0000 http://pavlovdotnet.wordpress.com/?p=458#comment-2845 Did you get a chance to update measurements of memory, performance and fragmentation? I'm really curious to see how much a difference these improvements made! Did you get a chance to update measurements of memory, performance and fragmentation?

I’m really curious to see how much a difference these improvements made!

]]> By: pd http://blog.pavlov.net/2008/02/05/jemalloc-now-on-the-trunk/#comment-2835 pd Wed, 06 Feb 2008 22:52:15 +0000 http://pavlovdotnet.wordpress.com/?p=458#comment-2835 mozcrt19.dll ? Got it. :) mozcrt19.dll ? Got it. :)

]]> By: RyanVM http://blog.pavlov.net/2008/02/05/jemalloc-now-on-the-trunk/#comment-2834 RyanVM Wed, 06 Feb 2008 18:10:15 +0000 http://pavlovdotnet.wordpress.com/?p=458#comment-2834 pd, Ferdinand - If you've got mozcrt19.dll in your Minefield directory, you've got a jemalloc-enabled build. That said, Stuart, is there a bug filed for the DLL not having proper resource information set on it (version info and the like)? Also, I saw a comment on another blog (I think it was bsmedberg's) about possibly linking the CRT with xul.dll. Is that a worthwhile possibility or a waste of time? pd, Ferdinand – If you’ve got mozcrt19.dll in your Minefield directory, you’ve got a jemalloc-enabled build.

That said, Stuart, is there a bug filed for the DLL not having proper resource information set on it (version info and the like)? Also, I saw a comment on another blog (I think it was bsmedberg’s) about possibly linking the CRT with xul.dll. Is that a worthwhile possibility or a waste of time?

]]> By: Ferdinand http://blog.pavlov.net/2008/02/05/jemalloc-now-on-the-trunk/#comment-2833 Ferdinand Wed, 06 Feb 2008 13:19:18 +0000 http://pavlovdotnet.wordpress.com/?p=458#comment-2833 Does this mean that the newest nightly's already use jemalloc? So everybody with 2008020504 should see better performance and less memory usage in the windows taskmanager? Or is it only used if you build it yourself? Does this mean that the newest nightly’s already use jemalloc? So everybody with 2008020504 should see better performance and less memory usage in the windows taskmanager? Or is it only used if you build it yourself?

]]> By: Mark S http://blog.pavlov.net/2008/02/05/jemalloc-now-on-the-trunk/#comment-2832 Mark S Wed, 06 Feb 2008 07:06:41 +0000 http://pavlovdotnet.wordpress.com/?p=458#comment-2832 So let's say we decide not to use jemalloc on mac (or linux). Would we make this decision because the perf & size wins are 'not enough'? If there is some, wouldn't it still be worth it? Is there some other detractor about using it that would make it not worth turning on? Also, if it were not turned on for mac would an investigation ensue to use something else for bigger wins? (For that matter, if it *is* turned on will we still look for an alternative that gets better wins?) So let’s say we decide not to use jemalloc on mac (or linux).
Would we make this decision because the perf & size wins are ‘not enough’? If there is some, wouldn’t it still be worth it? Is there some other detractor about using it that would make it not worth turning on?
Also, if it were not turned on for mac would an investigation ensue to use something else for bigger wins? (For that matter, if it *is* turned on will we still look for an alternative that gets better wins?)

]]> By: alanjstr http://blog.pavlov.net/2008/02/05/jemalloc-now-on-the-trunk/#comment-2831 alanjstr Wed, 06 Feb 2008 05:15:57 +0000 http://pavlovdotnet.wordpress.com/?p=458#comment-2831 Gimme gimme gimme gimme! I don't wanna wait until beta 4 :-(. But the only Firefox 3 I use is the portable version (currently b3). I'm excited for FF3, but I'll have to get over some of the UI changes. Gimme gimme gimme gimme! I don’t wanna wait until beta 4 :-( . But the only Firefox 3 I use is the portable version (currently b3). I’m excited for FF3, but I’ll have to get over some of the UI changes.

]]> By: pd http://blog.pavlov.net/2008/02/05/jemalloc-now-on-the-trunk/#comment-2830 pd Wed, 06 Feb 2008 03:35:41 +0000 http://pavlovdotnet.wordpress.com/?p=458#comment-2830 Stuart could you please confirm the build number just so we can be sure we're testing the jemalloc-enabled version? I just downloaded build 2008020504, is that the one? Stuart could you please confirm the build number just so we can be sure we’re testing the jemalloc-enabled version? I just downloaded build 2008020504, is that the one?

]]> By: Cory Nelson http://blog.pavlov.net/2008/02/05/jemalloc-now-on-the-trunk/#comment-2829 Cory Nelson Wed, 06 Feb 2008 03:06:07 +0000 http://pavlovdotnet.wordpress.com/?p=458#comment-2829 Ah, I did not realize that. I will have to play with the options a bit more then. Ah, I did not realize that. I will have to play with the options a bit more then.

]]>