Memory usage regression
mh+jemalloc at glandium.org
Fri Oct 26 08:08:24 PDT 2012
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 05:03:35PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:45:32AM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > Some more data:
> > http://i.imgur.com/3Q2js.png
> > This is zooming on the big bump at the beginning of iteration 2. Looking
> > at the corresponding allocation log, this corresponds to > 1MB
> > allocations with memalign, but turning them into mallocs doesn't change
> > the result, so it's not a memalign problem.
> > Looking more globally at the data, there is /some/ correlation with >
> > 1MB allocations, but occasionally, 128KB allocations do trigger the same
> > behaviour, as well as 64KB. One interesting fact is that it's only a
> > limited subset of these big allocations that trigger this. The vast
> > majority of them don't.
> > For reference, the unzoomed graph looks like this:
> > http://i.imgur.com/PViYm.png
> I rediscovered --enable-munmap, and tried again with that, thinking it
> could be related, and it did change something, but it's still growing:
Needless to say, the increases I was observing closely on the the zoomed
graph without a matching decrease was entirely due to munmap. Now I need
to find the remainder...
More information about the jemalloc-discuss