CPU and memory usage of jemalloc as compared to glibc malloc

malloc cpu-usage
deb picture deb · Oct 23, 2012 · Viewed 14.4k times · Source

I had recently learnt about jemalloc, it is the memory allocator used by firefox. I have tried integrating jemalloc into my system by overriding new and delete operator and calling the jemalloc equivalents of malloc and free i.e je_malloc and je_free.I have written a test application that does 100 million allocations.I have run the application both with glibc malloc and jemalloc, while running with jemalloc takes lesser time for such allocations the CPU utilization is pretty high, moreover the the memory foot print is also larger as compared to malloc. After reading this document on jemalloc analysis it seemed that jemalloc might have footprints greater than malloc as it employs techniques to optimize speed than memory. However, I haven't got any pointers to the CPU usage with Jemalloc. I would like to state that I working on a multiprocessor machine the details of which are given below.

processor : 11 vendor_id : GenuineIntel cpu family : 6 model : 44 model name : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X5680 @ 3.33GHz stepping : 2 cpu MHz : 3325.117 cache size : 12288 KB physical id : 1 siblings : 12 core id : 10 cpu cores : 6 apicid : 53 fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 11 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm syscall nx pdpe1gb rdtscp lm constant_tsc ida nonstop_tsc arat pni monitor ds_cpl vmx smx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr sse4_1 sse4_2 popcnt lahf_lm bogomips : 6649.91 clflush size : 64 cache_alignment : 64 address sizes : 40 bits physical, 48 bits virtual power management: [8]

I am using top -c -b -d 1.10 -p 24670 | awk -v time=$TIME '{print time,",",$9}' to keep track of the CPU usage.

Did someone have similar experiences while integrating Jemlloc?

Thanks!

Answer

Vitalii picture Vitalii · Nov 30, 2015

One wise guy said on CppCon that you never have to guess about performance. You have to measure it instead.

I tried to use jemalloc with multithreaded Linux application. It was custom application level protocol server (over TCP/IP). This C++ application used some Java code via JNI (near 5% of time it used Java, and 95% of time it used C++ code) I run 2 application instances in production mode. Each one had 150 threads.

After 72 hours of running glibc one used 900 M of memory, and jemalloc one used 2.2 G of memory. I didn't see significant CPU usage difference. Actual performance (average client request serving time) was near the same for both instances.

So, in my test glibc was much better than jemalloc. Of course, it is my application specific.

Conclusion: If you have reasons to think that your application memory management is not effective because of fragmentation, you have to make test similar to one I described. It is the only reliable information source for your specific needs. If jemalloc is always better that glibc, glibc will make jemalloc its official allocator. If glibc is always better, jemalloc will stop to exist. When competitors exist long time in parallel, it means that each one has its own usage niche.

Related questions

Difference between malloc and calloc?

What is the difference between doing: ptr = (char **) malloc (MAXELEMS * sizeof(char *)); or: ptr = (char **) calloc (MAXELEMS, sizeof(char*)); When is it a good idea to use calloc over malloc or vice versa?

Read More
In what cases do I use malloc and/or new?

I see in C++ there are multiple ways to allocate and free data and I understand that when you call malloc you should call free and when you use the new operator you should pair with delete and it is …

Read More
Do I cast the result of malloc?

In this question, someone suggested in a comment that I should not cast the result of malloc, i.e. int *sieve = malloc(sizeof(int) * length); rather than: int *sieve = (int *) malloc(sizeof(int) * length); Why would this be the case?

Read More