Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove Usage of Small Direct Byte Buffers #1176

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 2, 2023

Conversation

alexanderkiel
Copy link
Member

Using small direkt byte buffers is ineffective. We saw this in profiling and it's also documented in the byte buffer class.

@alexanderkiel alexanderkiel self-assigned this Sep 30, 2023
@alexanderkiel alexanderkiel added the performance Performance improvement label Sep 30, 2023
@alexanderkiel alexanderkiel added this to the v0.22.3 milestone Sep 30, 2023
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 30, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #1176 (3450940) into develop (786d08f) will decrease coverage by 0.04%.
Report is 1 commits behind head on develop.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

❗ Current head 3450940 differs from pull request most recent head f31056e. Consider uploading reports for the commit f31056e to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #1176      +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage    94.81%   94.77%   -0.04%     
===========================================
  Files          243      242       -1     
  Lines        15743    15635     -108     
  Branches       365      365              
===========================================
- Hits         14926    14818     -108     
  Misses         452      452              
  Partials       365      365              
Files Coverage Δ
...b/src/blaze/db/impl/index/compartment/resource.clj 98.07% <100.00%> (-0.11%) ⬇️
...ules/db/src/blaze/db/impl/index/resource_as_of.clj 98.25% <100.00%> (-0.23%) ⬇️
...laze/db/impl/index/resource_search_param_value.clj 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...laze/db/impl/index/search_param_value_resource.clj 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...odules/db/src/blaze/db/impl/index/system_as_of.clj 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...odules/db/src/blaze/db/impl/index/system_stats.clj 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...odules/db/src/blaze/db/impl/index/t_by_instant.clj 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
modules/db/src/blaze/db/impl/index/tx_success.clj 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
modules/db/src/blaze/db/impl/index/type_as_of.clj 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
modules/db/src/blaze/db/impl/index/type_stats.clj 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
... and 3 more

@alexanderkiel alexanderkiel force-pushed the feature/remove-direct-byte-buffer-usage branch 8 times, most recently from 830d60a to 60bee1c Compare October 1, 2023 15:57
Using small direct byte buffers is ineffective. We saw this in profiling
and it's also documented in the ByteBuffer class.
@alexanderkiel alexanderkiel force-pushed the feature/remove-direct-byte-buffer-usage branch from 60bee1c to f31056e Compare October 2, 2023 08:34
@alexanderkiel alexanderkiel merged commit eafdf6d into develop Oct 2, 2023
133 checks passed
@alexanderkiel alexanderkiel deleted the feature/remove-direct-byte-buffer-usage branch October 2, 2023 09:09
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
module:db performance Performance improvement
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

1 participant