Experiment: consider statically-linking jemalloc/mimalloc for glibc-based Linux
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Shell
- Stars
- 212
- Forks
- 132
- Avg merge
- 5h 18m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 11
Description
Now that this repo builds a statically-compiled shared library, we might want to consider also statically-linking an alternative memory allocator for glibc-based Linux to help avoid memory fragmentation.
https://github.com/lovell/sharp/issues/955 provides some context.
(We might want look at e.g. redis to see how it is built.)
We should also investigate mimalloc built with its security features to see what overhead, if any, the guard pages add.
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
No files or tests are named. Start by reviewing the repository's packaging scripts, the linked sharp issue, and Redis's build approach; investigate static jemalloc and mimalloc linking for glibc-based Linux, including mimalloc security features and guard-page overhead. Done means a decided approach with its trade-offs documented or implemented.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- shell
- Domain
- build-system
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100