[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: [PATCH] Pools space-time tradeoff

From: Karl Fogel <kfogel_at_newton.ch.collab.net>
Date: 2002-05-22 23:49:45 CEST

Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org> writes:
> That algorithm "won't work" ... there is too much searching taking place.
> The current pools code is way fast because it doesn't have to search for
> blocks in the typical allocation case.
> The pools code is quite sensitive. It is noticable if you add even one more
> 'if' statement to the typical-use codepath.
> (the proposed patches don't seem too bad because they really only come into
> play at non-typical points: when you need a new block, and when you're
> freeing a pool)

Ah, okay, so the "active block" means "try me first no matter what",
and the "inactive blocks" are "try us before allocating a new block",
and the distinction is made for speed.

(Except that even with the patch, we'll only try the first of the
inactive blocks.)


I guess I don't know how the benchmarks look, so I'll shut up now :-).

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed May 22 23:52:21 2002

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.