Received: from makus.postgresql.org (makus.postgresql.org [98.129.198.125]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7BA91DB08BA for ; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 06:50:22 -0300 (ADT) Received: from elizabeth.gransy.com ([89.187.132.199]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SC6Z9-0006OY-UF for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 09:50:21 +0000 Received: from sq.gransy.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by elizabeth.gransy.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2920E15E4CE6 for ; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 11:50:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: from 193.179.187.70 (proxying for unknown) (SquirrelMail authenticated user tv@fuzzy.cz) by sq.gransy.com with HTTP; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 11:50:00 +0200 Message-ID: <082fcdbd51cc660179f2a962bdae1b06.squirrel@sq.gransy.com> Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 11:50:00 +0200 Subject: anyone tried to use hoard allocator? From: "Tomas Vondra" To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.22 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Pg-Spam-Score: 0.8 (/) X-Archive-Number: 201203/164 X-Sequence-Number: 46614 Hi all, today I've noticed this link on HN: http://plasma.cs.umass.edu/emery/hoar= d Seems like an interesting option for systems with a lot of CPUs that are doing a lot of alloc operations. Right now I don't have a suitable system to test it - anyone tried to benchmark it? Tomas