microsoft / microsoft/mimalloc
why overriding new/delete operator in c++ with mimalloc-new-delete.h has better performance?
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- C
- Stars
- 13.4k
- Forks
- 1.2k
- Avg merge
- 4d 45m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 13
Description
out of curious, why overriding new/delete operator in c++ with mimalloc-new-delete.h has better performance?
With setting mimalloc_enable_redirect = 1, what is the difference between the default new/delete operator and the override version in "mimalloc-new-delete.h"?
Is there any performance regression without including the "mimalloc-new-delete.h"?
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
Read mimalloc-new-delete.h and the references to mimalloc_enable_redirect first. Compare the default and overridden new/delete paths and determine whether omitting the header changes performance; document the observed differences and any regression evidence.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- cpp
- Domain
- performance
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100