Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1214608 > unrolled thread

SLUB vs SLAB allocator with respect to 3.x and 4.x kernels

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

Contents

  SLUB vs SLAB allocator with respect to 3.x and 4.x kernels Navin Parakkal <navinp1912@gmail.com> - 2015-08-27 16:30 +0200
    Re: SLUB vs SLAB allocator with respect to 3.x and 4.x kernels Austin S Hemmelgarn <ahferroin7@gmail.com> - 2015-08-27 21:50 +0200
    Re: SLUB vs SLAB allocator with respect to 3.x and 4.x kernels David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> - 2015-08-27 23:10 +0200

#1214608 — SLUB vs SLAB allocator with respect to 3.x and 4.x kernels

Hi,

 I  found that in many worst case scenarios like fragmention of
allocator , slub performs well than slab.
  I also noticed that Centos /Ubuntu etc switched to SLUB but SLES
still uses SLAB in the default image.

Any particular reason where SLAB is the choice ?


I ask this since i find SLUB to be the default choice since 2.6.23 as
per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SLUB_(software)



Regards,
Navin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1214810

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 2015-08-27 10:26, Navin Parakkal wrote:
> Hi,
>
>   I  found that in many worst case scenarios like fragmention of
> allocator , slub performs well than slab.
>    I also noticed that Centos /Ubuntu etc switched to SLUB but SLES
> still uses SLAB in the default image.
>
> Any particular reason where SLAB is the choice ?
>
>
> I ask this since i find SLUB to be the default choice since 2.6.23 as
> per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SLUB_(software)
>
IIRC, SLUB isn't available/reliable on some arches (that and in some 
setups, the worst case scenarios are likely to never happen (for 
example, a machine with 1T of RAM that get's rebooted daily isn't likely 
to have significant issues with memory fragmentation)).

SLES probably hasn't switched because they're an enterprise distro, 
which in turn means changing as little as possible when updating.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1214830

On Thu, 27 Aug 2015, Navin Parakkal wrote:

> Hi,
> 
>  I  found that in many worst case scenarios like fragmention of
> allocator , slub performs well than slab.
>   I also noticed that Centos /Ubuntu etc switched to SLUB but SLES
> still uses SLAB in the default image.
> 
> Any particular reason where SLAB is the choice ?
> 

Slab doesn't have a reliance on high-order allocations for performance 
where fragmentation is a problem, it can use a smaller footprint due to 
slub's per-cpu partial slabs, it is faster on some networking round-robin 
benchmarks on nUMA machines, and it is has less impact when implementing 
full kmem accounting for memcg.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web