From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,df05246395602224
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: vaxs09@alpha.vitro.com (John Briggs)
Subject: Re: Variable-block memory managers bad in realtime
Date: 1997/12/23
Message-ID: <1997Dec23.082519@alpha.vitro.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 309622228
References: <gwinn-2212971856140001@dh5055115.res.ray.com>
Organization: Vitro Corporation
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-12-23T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <gwinn-2212971856140001@dh5055115.res.ray.com>, gwinn@res.ray.com (Joe Gwinn) writes:
> Fixed-block allocators waste no space, and have absolutely constant
> service time.

If I ask for 10 bytes and you feed me 100 bytes, there's 90 bytes wasted, no?
If I ask for 1000 bytes and your allocation area has 50 100 byte blocks
remaining, there's 5000 bytes wasted, no?

But you should know this.  So I'm puzzled.

	John Briggs			vaxs09@alpha.vitro.com