Jemalloc 5.4.0

(github.com)

56 points | by gkfasdfasdf 3 hours ago

2 comments

  • vocx2tx 1 hour ago
    For some context on why this release is notable: Jemalloc Postmortem [0]

    [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44264958

  • ZenoArrow 1 hour ago
    Why is this on the HN front page? Is there something particularly noteworthy about this release?
    • defrost 1 hour ago
      The noted resumption and likely a small amount of halo effect from the Comparison of Malloc() Algorithms thread two / three days ago.

      - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49715318

    • aktenlage 1 hour ago
      They resumed development on jemalloc only recently, after years of no releases.
    • ck45 1 hour ago
      I just checked whether it's the first release after Jason Evans stepped down as maintainer, but it isn't. That was the previous release, 5.3.1
    • baq 42 minutes ago
      jemalloc is something you should be aware of if you do software for a living
      • stackghost 10 minutes ago
        In the Before Times, the vast majority of software was written in garbage collected language where a working knowledge of the relative merits of C memory allocators is not useful or particularly relevant.

        Why would the scads of people writing JavaScript, Java, python, go, rails, etc need to be aware of jemalloc?

      • rfgplk 39 minutes ago
        Why? Writing a memory allocator is quite simple, and I'd argue that _everyone_ should write one from scratch for any kind of high performance application. It's also trivial to outperform general purpose allocators that have to satisfy countless constraints. I've written numerous special purpose mallocs that are a) both provably (formally) safer than the standard armada and b) significantly faster (>10x throughput).
        • groomlake 34 minutes ago
          Your experience writing memory allocators is irrelevant. The point is that jemalloc is widely used and that’s why it makes sense to be aware of it.
        • stackghost 13 minutes ago
          Writing an allocator is simple, you’re correct, but writing an allocator that doesn’t suck is not simple.
        • HackerThemAll 27 minutes ago
          I'd happily see performance, latency and stability of your allocators in massively multithreaded, long-living programs with workloads where hundreds or thousands of parallel threads continuously create and destroy short-lived small and medium objects.

          Writing allocators for domain-specific access patterns is easy. Writing a general-purpose high performing, stable allocator with bounded P99 latency is hard.

          Give your friend, Dunning–Kruger, some better pills to keep him from speaking through you.

          • Pannoniae 8 minutes ago
            You're correct, but his point is that you don't need to solve the generic problem. Solving the generic problem is very hard. Grug doesn't like solving hard problem. What does grug do? Solve five easy problems. Make an arena for the short-lived objects, reuse the objects, use generic multithreaded malloc for the rest. Grug happy.