Currently, the `SeqCst` ordering is used, which seems unnecessary:
+ Even `Relaxed` ordering guarantees that all updates are atomic and are executed in total order
+ User code only reads atomic for monitoring purposes, no "happens-before" relationships with actual allocations and deallocations are needed for this
If argumentation above is correct, I propose changing ordering to `Relaxed` to clarify that no synchronization is required here, and improve performance (if somebody copy-pastes this example into their code).
7b9f64475e