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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,f3f3bded7ff60ce8 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!news.glorb.com!newscon02.news.prodigy.com!newscon06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!newsfeed-00.mathworks.com!nntp.TheWorld.com!not-for-mail From: Robert A Duff Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Memory profiling Date: 27 May 2005 11:24:15 -0400 Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Message-ID: References: <429717E8.6030806@mailinator.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: pcls4.std.com 1117207456 5800 192.74.137.71 (27 May 2005 15:24:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 15:24:16 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:11185 Date: 2005-05-27T11:24:15-04:00 List-Id: "Alex R. Mosteo" writes: > I suppose something similar can be achieved using distinct storage pools > for each access type being tracked, but I find this more > inconvenient. Ummm, maybe a type holding a list of storage pools created > on demand... All those storage pools can share the same underlying memory pool. That is, each pool just keeps track of whatever debugging/statistics info you want, and then calls some underlying pool, or just does a "new", or calls malloc, or whatever. So gathering fine-grained (per type) information does not need to imply that you have to actually allocate type-segregated data. - Bob