slap_sl_malloc

[Howard Chu <hyc@symas.com>]

While I would hate to slow this thing down, it appears we may need to 
use a smarter algorithm here. Currently sl_malloc acts like a stack, 
objects must be freed in reverse order of allocation otherwise they 
remain allocated. I'm seeing a lot of "sl_malloc of XX bytes failed, 
using ch_malloc" log messages while watching syncrepl do its thing, 
which implies that there is a leak, or objects are not being freed in 
the correct order.

I'm not entirely sure there's a leak. But it's very likely that things 
aren't being freed in order, and it's difficult to verify a proper order 
now. Which implies that we maybe want sl_malloc/sl_free to keep a free 
list, coalesce blocks, etc., etc. - all the things a real malloc routine 
does.
--

 -- Howard Chu
 Chief Architect, Symas Corp.       Director, Highland Sun
 http://www.symas.com               http://highlandsun.com/hyc
 Symas: Premier OpenSource Development and Support