Issue #14759 has been updated by shyouhei (Shyouhei Urabe).


normalperson (Eric Wong) wrote:
> shyouhei / ruby-lang.org wrote:
>  > Yes the question is, what exactly is the value of
>  > MALLOC_ARENA_MAX that a user should specify to let malloc
>  > behave as it works in 2.5 now?
>  
>  (Etc.nprocessors * 8) on 64-bit, (Etc.nprocessors * 2) on 32-bit.

Hmm.  Thank you.  Now I am very faintly negative because
MALLOC_ARENA_MAX=2 ruby ...
is much easier than
MALLOC_ARENA_MAX=$((`ls -1 /sys/bus/cpu/devices/|wc -l`*8)) ruby...

----------------------------------------
Feature #14759: [PATCH] set M_ARENA_MAX for glibc malloc
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/14759#change-73462

* Author: normalperson (Eric Wong)
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: 
* Target version: 
----------------------------------------
Not everybody benefits from jemalloc and the extra download+install
time is not always worth it.  Lets make the user experience for
glibc malloc users better, too.

Personally, I prefer using M_ARENA_MAX=1 (via MALLOC_ARENA_MAX
env) myself, but there is currently a performance penalty for
that.


gc.c (Init_GC): set M_ARENA_MAX=2 for glibc malloc

glibc malloc creates too many arenas and leads to fragmentation.
Given the existence of the GVL, clamping to two arenas seems
to be a reasonable trade-off for performance and memory usage.

Some users (including myself for several years, now) prefer only
one arena, now, so continue to respect users' wishes when
MALLOC_ARENA_MAX is set.

Thanks to Mike Perham for the reminder [ruby-core:86843]


This doesn't seem to conflict with jemalloc, so it should be safe
for all glibc-using systems.


---Files--------------------------------
0001-gc.c-Init_GC-set-M_ARENA_MAX-2-for-glibc-malloc.patch (1.46 KB)


-- 
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request / ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>