Ondrej Spanel, BIS Lead Programmer
Looking into the BI wikipage : http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/A...mory_Allocator
Take the 'MemTotalReserved()'
- Total memory reserved by the allocator (should correspond to VirtualAlloc with MEM_RESERVE)
I find this function call in the hoard source in the two header files:
And in a c file - sbrk.c
Since I'm such a novice at programming (anything) I'd like the community to help modify the hoard38.zip source to conform to the DLL Interface required by the game engine.
I have Visual Studio so I should be able to figure out how to make/build/compile from the sources.
But atm - it's too much work for me to figure this out on my own...I think ;-)
One thing you might want to consider: it's not possible to call a 64bit DLL from a 32bit executable.
A few questions:
- Should we test tbb4malloc_bi.dll?
- What is different to tbb3malloc_bi.dll?
- Should we test some other, like the open source ones - which ones?
- How to test? What to look for in testing?
- Prio is stability, performance and then memory usage?
Would be easier if people can try it with a good test/benchmark mission where they can see or feel the differences. Something simple and userfriendly.
props for BIS for making this move, but some more information and guidelines would be appreciated (see kju's post). even with a lot of very knowledgeable guys around here...
I guess BI may or may not have a license for the commercial version (Intel resource link http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-tbb/
But apparently BI can distribute a version of TTB3+4 under GPLv2 + RE or maybe they have a license for the 'commercial' TTB.
Anyway - OS or not - I'm quite interested in (alternative) implementations that are focused on optimizing code-paths for multicore - Numa systems.
Dreaming again : Would be snazzy to have the core engine compiled specifically for the code-path that will give the optimal (parallel) execution flow - by the press of a button ;-) and a fallback default codepath.
Update - Maybe nedmalloc should be my focus point instead of hoard
It looks like BI will provide the above list, execpt for the last of course....ArmA_2:_Custom_Memory_Allocator
tbb3malloc_bi - based on Intel TBB 3, distributed under GPL v2 + RE
tbb4malloc_bi - based on Intel TBB 4, distributed under GPL v2 + RE
jemalloc_bi - not available yet, based on JEMalloc, distributed under BSD-derived license
tcmalloc_bi - not available yet, based on TCMalloc, distributed under New BSD license
nedmalloc_bi - not available yet, based on NedMalloc, distributed under Boost Software License
customMalloc_bi - not provided, feel free to plug-in your own
:-D So maybe I should just be patient.....
Last edited by DBGB; Oct 28 2011 at 13:25. Reason: Forget about hoard if nedmalloc claim is true
Dunno if its related to those memor allocators, but performance dropped significantly with the latest beta. Im on Win7 x64.
Marek Spanel: [...] Every single element is well taught so that it fits together. So this is a significant change, because with ArmA 1 it was just random, really.
We made some units because we had to. There wasn't much passion from our side with the first ArmA, to be honest. This time it's different. (Videogamer.com Interview
Please BIS: Arma2 must become a TRUE MASTERPIECE - Not a middle-heavy catastrophe!
Like what is significantly?
Like where/when/how do you notice this?
Like what are your startup parameters?
Like what are the mods?
Half of that is available by simply attaching your RPT file.