Re: win2k/cygwin cannot handle even moderately sized packs

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Nov 07, 2006 at 02:55:01PM +0100, Alex Riesen wrote:
>>So the problem is probably memory fragmentation.
>
>probably.
>
>>You might have more joy if you allocated one HUGE chunk immediately on
>>startup to use for the pack, and then kept re-using that chunk.
>
>Well, it is not _one_ chunk. The windows/cygwin abomin...combination

I would like to ask you, once again, to exercise some adult self-control
when you feel compelled to answer questions about Cygwin.  If you need
to vent your frustration in some direction, I'd suggest getting a dog.
They can look very contrite when you yell at them even if they didn't
actually do anything wrong.

>may take an issue with this: it seem to copy complete address space
>at fork, which even for such a small packs I have here takes system
>down lightly (yes, I tried it).

Yes, Cygwin copies the heap on fork since Windows doesn't implement fork.

FWIW, Cygwin's malloc is based on Doug Lea's malloc.  It reverts to
using mmap when allocating memory above a certain threshhold.

cgf
--
Christopher Faylor			spammer? ->	aaaspam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cygwin Co-Project Leader				aaaspam@xxxxxxxxxx
TimeSys, Inc.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]