| From: | Steve Atkins <steve(at)blighty(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | PostgreSQL Performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: anyone tried to use hoard allocator? |
| Date: | 2012-03-26 16:00:18 |
| Message-ID: | 340D90B6-9FA3-4EBA-930A-DECA0CF916CB@blighty.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Mar 26, 2012, at 2:50 AM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> today I've noticed this link on HN: http://plasma.cs.umass.edu/emery/hoard
>
> Seems like an interesting option for systems with a lot of CPUs that are
> doing a lot of alloc operations. Right now I don't have a suitable system
> to test it - anyone tried to benchmark it?
It's just another allocator - not a bad one, but it's been around for years. It's
mostly aimed at reducing contention in multi-threaded applications, so
it's not terribly applicable to strictly single-threaded postgresql.
It's licensing is pretty much incompatible with postgresql too.
Cheers,
Steve
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua Berkus | 2012-03-27 19:58:22 | Re: Determining working set size |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2012-03-26 11:09:34 | Re: anyone tried to use hoard allocator? |