| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, John Gorman <johngorman2(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PATCH: two slab-like memory allocators |
| Date: | 2016-10-20 14:43:18 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmobJrM74FRTcmn2JDMVbLB0a5pj5e3ieLBMzkDNtrxF4dw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 6:27 PM, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> I agree though that the usability beyond the ReoderBuffer is limited
> because everything that will want to use it for part of allocations will
> get much more complicated by the fact that it will have to use two
> different allocators.
>
> I was wondering if rather than trying to implement new allocator we
> should maybe implement palloc_fixed which would use some optimized
> algorithm for fixed sized objects in our current allocator. The
> advantage of that would be that we could for example use that for things
> like ListCell easily (memory management of which I see quite often in
> profiles).
The sb_alloc allocator I proposed a couple of years ago would work
well for this case, I think.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2016-10-20 14:54:00 | Re: Avoiding pin scan during btree vacuum |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-10-20 14:42:01 | Re: incorrect libpq comment |