(Windows) improving malloc performance using HeapAlloc, VirtualAlloc..etc

Hi !!
my code :
----------------------------------
//class definition
class FF
{
public:
      CString FileName,FilePath,Ext,Size;
      FF(CString FN,CString FP,CString E,LPCSTR S)
      {
            FileName=FN;
            FileName.FreeExtra();
            FilePath=FP;
            FilePath.FreeExtra();
            Ext=E;
            Ext.FreeExtra();
            Size=S;
            Size.FreeExtra();
      }
};
---------------------------------------
i have the foll. code that creates objects of class FF (the code is called from a number of threads)
---------------------------------------
FF* X = new FF(FileName,FilePath,Ext,Size);
SomeCollection->Add(X);
-----------------------------------
the above code might be called nearly 200,000 times (from all the threads put together).

my question :
i came across an article on MSDN (http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/techart/optcode.htm). It was mentioned tht the performance of malloc can be increased using VirtualAlloc in some cases, or HeapCreate and HeapAlloc in some other cases ... i didn't understand in which cases exactly .. I was hoping someone could explain it .. or show me some way to optimize the above code..

thanks
muskad202
LVL 2
muskad202Asked:
Who is Participating?
I wear a lot of hats...

"The solutions and answers provided on Experts Exchange have been extremely helpful to me over the last few years. I wear a lot of hats - Developer, Database Administrator, Help Desk, etc., so I know a lot of things but not a lot about one thing. Experts Exchange gives me answers from people who do know a lot about one thing, in a easy to use platform." -Todd S.

AlexFMCommented:
Change constructor definition to:

FF(LPCSTR  FN,LPCSTR ,LPCSTR  E,LPCSTR  S)

This should improve performance significantly. Don't case about allocation spped in CString - it is quite good and you have no much chances to improve it. FreeExtra calls are also unnecessary.
0
AlexFMCommented:
Correction:
Don't care about allocation speed in ...

Typo, as usual. Sorry.
0
muskad202Author Commented:
the first 3 parameters to the constructor are CString coz, in the code where the objects of the class are created, the parameters passed to the constructor are CString .., i.e, in
--------------------
FF* X = new FF(FileName,FilePath,Ext,Size);
SomeCollection->Add(X);
-----------------
FileName,FilePath,Ext are CStrings..
so, was thinking, if the constructor definition expects LPCSTR, then the parameters have to be converted to LPCSTR from CString, and then again from LPCSTR to CString when they get stored (FileName=FN; FilePath=FP;  Ext=E;Size=S;)

....
muskad202
0
Cloud Class® Course: Microsoft Office 2010

This course will introduce you to the interfaces and features of Microsoft Office 2010 Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Outlook, and Access. You will learn about the features that are shared between all products in the Office suite, as well as the new features that are product specific.

stsanzCommented:
Write the constructor like this:
FF(CString FN,CString FP,CString E,LPCSTR S)
  : FileName(FN), FilePath(FP), Ext(E), Size(S)
    {
    }

This will prevent the program to create first an empty CString for each member, and then affect them.
This way, the CString creation is made only once


Now if you really want to improve performance, don't use CStrings at all.
Use char buffers instead, as AlexFM said.

class FF
{
public:
    char* FileName ;
FilePath,Ext,Size;
    FF(CString FN,CString FP,CString E,LPCSTR S)
    {
         FileName=FN;
         FileName.FreeExtra();
         FilePath=FP;
         FilePath.FreeExtra();
         Ext=E;
         Ext.FreeExtra();
         Size=S;
         Size.FreeExtra();
    }
};



0
stsanzCommented:
Oops! correction:

Write the constructor like this:
FF(CString FN,CString FP,CString E,LPCSTR S)
  : FileName(FN), FilePath(FP), Ext(E), Size(S)
    {
    }

This will prevent the program to create first an empty CString for each member, and then affect them.
This way, the CString creation is made only once.


Now if you really want to improve performance, don't use CStrings at all.
Use char buffers instead, as AlexFM said.

class FF
{
public:
  LPSTR FileName ;
  LPSTR FilePath ;
  LPSTR Ext ;
  LPSTR Size ;

    FF(char* FN, char* FP, char* E,LPCSTR S)
    {
       FileName = strdup(FN) ;
       FilePath = strdup(FP) ;
       Ext = strdup(E) ;
       Size = strdup(S) ;
    }
};

This way you create only one object: the FF object, and not multiple CString objects.

0

Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by

Your issues matter to us.

Facing a tech roadblock? Get the help and guidance you need from experienced professionals who care. Ask your question anytime, anywhere, with no hassle.

Start your 7-day free trial
stsanzCommented:
Now, the Microsoft article about VirtualAlloc, HeapCreate and HeapAlloc says that when you need to allocate multiple small blocks of memory, it's faster to allocate one big block once, and then share the memory between all the small blocks.

In your case, this is not so easy, since the size of the strings is not predictible.
0
muskad202Author Commented:
the strdup function .. it allocates memory also ?? if yes, how much does it allocate?? just enough for the string..hopefully, coz i can't afford extra memory for each object..

also, i was using the FF class mainly becoz i needed the constructor to be called which in turn would call the CString construtors .. if i now decide to use only LPCSTRs instead, can i improve the code by using a struct FF incase of the class FF?

thanks
muskad202
0
muskad202Author Commented:
and now, if i do use a struct, with 4 LPCSTRs, then the size of each struct becomes fixed (4 * sizeof(char*)). in this case, would i benefit by using VirtualAlloc/HeapAlloc/HeapCreate ??
0
stsanzCommented:
>>how much does it allocate?? just enough for the string?
Yes. It allocates strlen(str)+1 for terminal \0.
(by the way it will be slightly less than a CString object).

>>can i improve the code by using a struct FF incase of the class FF?
No. There is no performance tradeoff between struct and class.

>>the size of each struct becomes fixed (4 * sizeof(char*)). in this case, would i benefit by using VirtualAlloc/HeapAlloc/HeapCreate ??
No, because you also need to allocate memory for the strings (strdup job). This memory size is not fixed.

0
It's more than this solution.Get answers and train to solve all your tech problems - anytime, anywhere.Try it for free Edge Out The Competitionfor your dream job with proven skills and certifications.Get started today Stand Outas the employee with proven skills.Start learning today for free Move Your Career Forwardwith certification training in the latest technologies.Start your trial today
C++

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.