summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/source4/lib/talloc/talloc_guide.txt
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'source4/lib/talloc/talloc_guide.txt')
-rw-r--r--source4/lib/talloc/talloc_guide.txt2
1 files changed, 1 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/source4/lib/talloc/talloc_guide.txt b/source4/lib/talloc/talloc_guide.txt
index 7477dad266..13ceae9d82 100644
--- a/source4/lib/talloc/talloc_guide.txt
+++ b/source4/lib/talloc/talloc_guide.txt
@@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ Performance
All the additional features of talloc() over malloc() do come at a
price. We have a simple performance test in Samba4 that measures
talloc() versus malloc() performance, and it seems that talloc() is
-about 10% slower than malloc() on my x86 Debian Linux box. For Samba,
+about 4% slower than malloc() on my x86 Debian Linux box. For Samba,
the great reduction in code complexity that we get by using talloc
makes this worthwhile, especially as the total overhead of
talloc/malloc in Samba is already quite small.