Re: [PATCH 00/13] object store: alloc

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

 



On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:22 AM, Duy Nguyen <pclouds@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I think the two have quite different characteristics. alloc.c code is
> driven by overhead. struct blob is only 24 bytes each and about 1/3
> the repo is blobs, and each malloc has 16 bytes overhead or so if I
> remember correctly. struct cache_entry at minimum in 88 bytes so
> relative overhead is not that a big deal (but sure reducing it is
> still very nice).
>
> mem-pool is about allocation speed,

I don't think so, given that we do a linear search in each block allocation.

> but I think that's not a concern
> for alloc.c because when we do full rev walk, I think I/O is always
> the bottleneck (maybe object lookup as well). I don't see a good way
> to have the one memory allocator that satisfyies both to be honest.

By changing the allocation size of a block to be larger than 1024 entries
in alloc. we should lessen the impact of management overhead, and then
the mem pool can be more than feasible.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux