Optimize persistent_term:put/2 and erase/1 #2389
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
3ea572b
to
3256e31
Compare
8db3b73
to
7e2b5e5
Compare
by writing directly into active hash table if possible.
7c38f6c
to
f1329b3
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
by avoiding copy the entire hash table if possible and instead write directly into the active table.
This is mostly an optimization wrt CPU and maybe memory fragmentation. The latency of both
put/2anderase/1in a busy VM will still be significant as they have to wait for thread progress before return to guarantee read consistency without expensive memory barriers inget/1.