On 10/02/2011 12:45 PM, Henri Beauchamp wrote:
> On Sun, 02 Oct 2011 10:20:58 -0400, Mike Chase wrote:
>
>> One more note. I have 16gb of memory on this system so the large heap
>> really isnt a problem per-se.
> It is, because you will not be able to get more than 3Gb of virtual
> memory per proc
On Sun, 02 Oct 2011 10:20:58 -0400, Mike Chase wrote:
> One more note. I have 16gb of memory on this system so the large heap
> really isnt a problem per-se.
It is, because you will not be able to get more than 3Gb of virtual
memory per process, and when this virtual space gets fragmented (whic
On Sun, 02 Oct 2011 10:12:57 -0400, Mike Chase wrote:
> On 10/02/2011 03:48 AM, Henri Beauchamp wrote:
> > On Sun, 02 Oct 2011 00:23:36 -0400, Mike Chase wrote:
> >
> >> Setting this as described for me made the client (on Linux) so slow as
> >> to be unuseable. I am seeing occasional crashesas w
On Sun, 2 Oct 2011 16:39:49 +0200, Carlo Wood wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Oct 2011 10:20:47 +0200
> Henri Beauchamp wrote:
>
> > Really, the only true motivation behind the use of tcmalloc in mesh
> > viewers (it was not use for non-mesh viewers) is to provide aligned
> > allocations. Without it, and the
On Sun, 2 Oct 2011 10:20:47 +0200
Henri Beauchamp wrote:
> Really, the only true motivation behind the use of tcmalloc in mesh
> viewers (it was not use for non-mesh viewers) is to provide aligned
> allocations. Without it, and the way the mesh viewer code is written,
> the viewer simply crashes
On 10/02/2011 10:12 AM, Mike Chase wrote:
> On 10/02/2011 03:48 AM, Henri Beauchamp wrote:
>> On Sun, 02 Oct 2011 00:23:36 -0400, Mike Chase wrote:
>>
>>> Setting this as described for me made the client (on Linux) so slow as
>>> to be unuseable. I am seeing occasional crashesas well and tried thi
On 10/02/2011 03:48 AM, Henri Beauchamp wrote:
> On Sun, 02 Oct 2011 00:23:36 -0400, Mike Chase wrote:
>
>> Setting this as described for me made the client (on Linux) so slow as
>> to be unuseable. I am seeing occasional crashesas well and tried this
>> as a workaround.
> I can tell you the slow
I was trying to get all libraries to build w/o modifying the library source.
google-perftools is/was on the needs work list. Vcexpress doesn't have a
command line switch /Upgrade as devenv does. However, you can open an older
solution file in the VS2010 Express IDE and it will upgrade to the lat
Am Sonntag, 2. Oktober 2011 schrieb WolfPup Lowenhar:
> Lance,
> Nicky P has a new fix for
> https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/OPEN-69 this will allow Open
> Source Developers using the Express version of Visual Studios
> properly build all 3p-libs as well as the viewer.
awesome!
i guess I'll use
Lance,
Nicky P has a new fix for https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/OPEN-69 this
will allow Open Source Developers using the Express version of Visual
Studios properly build all 3p-libs as well as the viewer.
> -Original Message-
> From: opensource-dev-boun...@lists.secondlife.com [mailto:
Am Sonntag, 2. Oktober 2011 schrieb Henri Beauchamp:
> > 1. is simple enough but what do i do about 2?
>
> Simply recover the v1.7 version of 3p-google-perftools: it compiles
> fine here (under VS2005).
Doesn't under VS2010 EXPRESS...
what now?
bye,
LC
___
On Sun, 2 Oct 2011 08:39:06 +0200, Lance Corrimal wrote:
> second, two issues:
>
> 1. viever_manifest.py needs to be edited to reflect the fact that
> libtcmalloc.so now has the version 0.2.2 and not 0.1.0 :)
Yes, unless you recompile v1.7.
> 2. 3p-google-perftools does not build under VS2010
On Sun, 2 Oct 2011 01:12:40 -0400, Zabb65 wrote:
> It is not desirable to let the default allocation engine run under
> Linux, and possibly Mac. glibc has an incredibly slow allocator for
> small objects, and tcmalloc was implemented to remedy these
> situations(This is what I heard, but have not
Am Sonntag, 2. Oktober 2011 schrieb Henri Beauchamp:
> On Sun, 02 Oct 2011 00:23:36 -0400, Mike Chase wrote:
> > Setting this as described for me made the client (on Linux) so
> > slow as to be unuseable. I am seeing occasional crashesas well
> > and tried this as a workaround.
>
> I can tell you
On Sun, 02 Oct 2011 00:23:36 -0400, Mike Chase wrote:
> Setting this as described for me made the client (on Linux) so slow as
> to be unuseable. I am seeing occasional crashesas well and tried this
> as a workaround.
I can tell you the slow down is *certainly* not coming from this fix:
I cond
15 matches
Mail list logo
