Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken!decwrl!pa.dec.com!bacchus!mwm
From: mwm@pa.dec.com (Mike (My Watch Has Windows) Meyer)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer
Subject: Re: free() in SAS C
Message-ID: <MWM.91May6120013@raven.pa.dec.com>
Date: 6 May 91 19:00:13 GMT
References: <1991May02.143148.22732@edb.tih.no>
	<MWM.91May3182036@raven.pa.dec.com>
	<dillon.7247@overload.Berkeley.CA.US>
Sender: news@pa.dec.com (News)
Distribution: comp
Organization: Missionaria Phonibalonica
Lines: 28
In-Reply-To: dillon@overload.Berkeley.CA.US's message of 4 May 91 19:15:40 GMT

In article <dillon.7247@overload.Berkeley.CA.US> dillon@overload.Berkeley.CA.US (Matthew Dillon) writes:
   >If you're doing lots of frees/allocs later on, you'll take a
   >performance hit.
   >
   >	<mike

       Actually, AllocMem & FreeMem are *faster* than SAS/C's
       malloc & free.  The only loose is that your system is more
       susceptible to fragmentation.

Matt,

I did some tests on 1.3, doing lots of small mallocs/frees vs. doing
lots of AllocMem/FreeMems. Malloc/free was _much_ faster. The critical
condition is that you're reusing space, and not getting new space from
the system. If you're not reusing the space, then AllocMem & FreeMem
will be faster.

If you're going to do a bunch of allocations, then a bunch of frees, a
single AllocEntry (I think that's the name I want) call is probably
fastest.

	<mike
--
Cheeseburger in paradise				Mike Meyer
Making the best of every virtue and vice		mwm@pa.dec.com
Worth every damn bit of sacrifice			decwrl!mwm
To get a cheeseburger in paradise