Date:	Tue, 9 May 2000 15:56:59 -0400
Message-Id:	<200005091956.PAA28210@envy.delorie.com>
From:	DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to:	<200005091906.PAA10862@indy.delorie.com> (message from Eli
	Zaretskii on Tue, 9 May 2000 15:06:15 -0400 (EDT))
Subject:	Re: Perfomance of gc-simple
References:	<200005091512 DOT LAA22852 AT qnx DOT com> <200005091906 DOT PAA10862 AT indy DOT delorie DOT com>
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> Yes, but why use mmap for that?  Why not use sbrk?

When you're done with the mmap'd memory, you can unmap it and release
it to the system.  With sbrk you can only return it to your local
heap, and even then it remains fragmented.  Plus, individual mmap'd
regions can be grown as needed.

- Raw text -