Empirical measurements of six allocation-intensive C programs
ACM SIGPLAN Notices
Using lifetime predictors to improve memory allocation performance
PLDI '93 Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 1993 conference on Programming language design and implementation
Evaluating models of memory allocation
ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation (TOMACS)
The memory fragmentation problem: solved?
Proceedings of the 1st international symposium on Memory management
ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR)
A dynamic storage allocation technique based on memory residence time
Communications of the ACM
A comparison of next-fit, first-fit, and best-fit
Communications of the ACM
Dynamic memory allocation in computer simulation
Communications of the ACM
On the external storage fragmentation produced by first-fit and best-fit allocation strategies
Communications of the ACM
Composing high-performance memory allocators
Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 2001 conference on Programming language design and implementation
A study of the allocation behavior of C++ programs
Journal of Systems and Software
Optimizing Dynamic Memory Management in a Multithreaded Application Executing on a Multiprocessor
ICPP '98 Proceedings of the 1998 International Conference on Parallel Processing
Dynamic Storage Allocation: A Survey and Critical Review
IWMM '95 Proceedings of the International Workshop on Memory Management
Worst-case analysis of memory allocation algorithms
STOC '72 Proceedings of the fourth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing
New methods for dynamic storage allocation (Fast Fits)
SOSP '83 Proceedings of the ninth ACM symposium on Operating systems principles
The real-time behavior of dynamic memory management in C++
RTAS '95 Proceedings of the Real-Time Technology and Applications Symposium
Analysis of free-storage algorithms
IBM Systems Journal
Hi-index | 0.00 |
Dynamic memory allocation often makes up a large part of program execution time. Different variants of the best-fit allocator are implemented and their space and time costs measured and compared. We found variants of this algorithm that are 3-33% faster than the Doug Lea 2.7.0 allocator.