From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3C32198005 for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 21:38:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D95E1E06C8; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 21:38:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ee0-f45.google.com (mail-ee0-f45.google.com [74.125.83.45]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C0DA2E06AF for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 21:38:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ee0-f45.google.com with SMTP id b57so2845273eek.32 for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 13:37:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:from:to:subject:date:message-id:user-agent:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=XpsLPWFu/dXxkrTtWpSL/lAiZVx5gW4bUngzySt4PCQ=; b=EGdQntgNSw6RKQkhb/2S2DhwfvrPmg0hFhufeyuKvrIHYW7CdAlVZRAECpAq7y9jpa VhMj7AXl3X7BaQwV1lYxZncTjglWrsHYgF24OXOJJ0ZPx4tRwiQZNh4Y692UONf0oLED JiXzFamFaL9Z50Kbg0JrRuGq3zjNwPeoFJ5/QyloTAwL7TtwC8MfZAlzbOCIhYK/Aybz U4AQ/iO+Hpsuzb8JhtDF6oM7FJ7Z6/rYirU0lxPwpnWgTIybmwEDBe5agUJtOfkDFWIM hC2rKbnz5kXLHz3sbilTFILRpUaJTuSTrTfouGUKeTowNm46fRQak8dGzwzFrhOb5NzT WtLQ== X-Received: by 10.14.5.6 with SMTP id 6mr53737846eek.42.1361914679121; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 13:37:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from lebrodyl.localnet (89-70-93-144.dynamic.chello.pl. [89.70.93.144]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id m46sm3353819eeo.16.2013.02.26.13.37.58 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 26 Feb 2013 13:37:58 -0800 (PST) From: Maciej Mrozowski To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Evaluating a new malloc() Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 22:37:42 +0100 Message-ID: <3392533.WNcSa2bQvd@lebrodyl> User-Agent: KMail/4.9.5 (Linux/3.6.11-gentoo; KDE/4.9.5; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <512CB9B8.9060308@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart8516652.DXUJNXyaNr"; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Archives-Salt: e509e850-9431-4729-8b62-a409f4d46f0d X-Archives-Hash: 9a7eefdbdf09da39ac30ed1c5c353d7a --nextPart8516652.DXUJNXyaNr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" On Tuesday 26 of February 2013 11:44:31 Rich Freeman wrote: > On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Alec Warner wrote: > > I see a *HUGE* reason. glibc ships with ptmalloc. If you think they > > should use jemalloc, talk to them. Don't just do it in Gentoo. > > Certainly I think it would be far more productive to talk to the glibc > maintainers first. You mean productive like below? ;) http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11261 Ulrich Drepper: "Stop reopening. There is a solution for people who are stupid enough to create too many threads. No implementation will be perfect for everyone. The glibc implementation is tuned for reasonable programs and will run much faster than any other I tested." Merge of jemalloc upstream is likely never going to happen. regards MM --nextPart8516652.DXUJNXyaNr Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAlEtKyYACgkQFuHa/bHpVduJFwCfYWLtNjA/Zgj6EHDlcXw6Rm8j BzQAnA0zH+bLJbgulHppKdo7b9LK6RQC =Fq5i -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart8516652.DXUJNXyaNr--