Make patterns in Names static #26
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
cfieber
reviewed
Aug 5, 2019
cfieber
approved these changes
Aug 5, 2019
brharrington
approved these changes
Aug 5, 2019
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As an FYI, this has come up previously, see #21 and Netflix/spectator#551 for details.
maggieneterval
force-pushed
the
pattern-perf
branch
from
98b0927
to
faff9a9
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
While helping a user profile a Clouddriver pod handling large numbers of GCE resources, we discovered that a non-trivial proportion of allocations in some threads stem from calls to
Pattern.compileinNames.extractLabeledVariable, which will happen eight times every time a new Names instance is created (so, every time we callKeys.parsefrom Clouddriver's GCE provider). This change adds these patterns as static members ofNames. It also removes the tests that callextractLabeledVariablewith invalid values; since it's a private method and only called from the constructor with static values it seemed like this would be fine, but let me know if I'm missing something!