Re: reducing buffer allocations

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, 4 Feb 2016, Adam C. Emerson wrote:
> On 04/02/2016, Sage Weil wrote:
> [snip]
> > (2) convert buffer::list into an intrusive_list, while embedding N
> > (=3) buffer::ptr's in the buffer::raw so that most buffers require only
> > 1 allocation (provided they aren't on more than N lists).
> [snip]
> > Do we want both, or just 1, or is there an alternative we should
> > consider?
> 
> Do we have any places in the code where we seek into a buffer::list that has a
> good number of buffer::ptrs in it? If so then we could get a speedup by
> switching from an intrusive list to an intrusive set (or avlset).

There are a very few, but not many.  They tend to be in debug code only.

Re: Allen's comment: we could use small_vector<> in combination with (1) 
too and probably get much of the benefit, but (1) + (2) should avoid 
the need for it at all...

sage
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [CEPH Users]     [Ceph Large]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux BTRFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]
  Powered by Linux