From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rev-list: preallocate object hash table in --all --objects
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:32:00 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130329203200.GA32155@sigill.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACsJy8AXUUz3=-pWeK-y0va-=d_-aCeNgH8rAtMZdq0PE+X97g@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 10:29:52PM +0700, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 10:12 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
> > This feels weirdly specific, and like we should just be tuning our hash
> > table growth better. You show a 3.2% speedup here. I was able to get a
> > 2.8% speedup just by doing this:
>
> It also uses a lot more memory. 5.8m entries for ".. * 2" and 8.8m for
> "... * 3". Probably no big deal for modern machines..
Yeah, it will use more, but it's not going to waste more than half again
more than we already were.
> > It might be worth trying to figure out what the optimium growth rate is
> > first, which would help this use case and others. With less fragile
> > code.
>
> Agreed. Although I think it's getting out of my domain. I'm not even
> sure how many factors are involved.
There's the load factor that causes us to grow, and the growth factor of
how aggressively we expand when we do need to grow. I fooled around with
a few numbers and the patch below seemed to give good results. Probably
varying both numbers over a range and graphing the result would make
sense, but I don't have time to do it at the moment (each run takes a
while, if I do best-of-five).
[before]
real 0m46.255s
user 0m45.812s
sys 0m0.276s
[after]
real 0m43.729s
user 0m43.204s
sys 0m0.356s
diff --git a/object.c b/object.c
index 20703f5..c3be886 100644
--- a/object.c
+++ b/object.c
@@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ static void grow_object_hash(void)
static void grow_object_hash(void)
{
int i;
- int new_hash_size = obj_hash_size < 32 ? 32 : 2 * obj_hash_size;
+ int new_hash_size = obj_hash_size < 32 ? 32 : obj_hash_size * 5/2;
struct object **new_hash;
new_hash = xcalloc(new_hash_size, sizeof(struct object *));
@@ -116,7 +116,7 @@ void *create_object(const unsigned char *sha1, int type, void *o)
obj->flags = 0;
hashcpy(obj->sha1, sha1);
- if (obj_hash_size - 1 <= nr_objs * 2)
+ if (nr_objs + 1 > obj_hash_size * 1/3)
grow_object_hash();
insert_obj_hash(obj, obj_hash, obj_hash_size);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-29 20:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-29 13:20 [PATCH] rev-list: preallocate object hash table in --all --objects Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
2013-03-29 15:12 ` Jeff King
2013-03-29 15:29 ` Duy Nguyen
2013-03-29 20:32 ` Jeff King [this message]
2013-04-01 18:33 ` Jeff King
2013-03-29 16:04 ` Junio C Hamano
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130329203200.GA32155@sigill.intra.peff.net \
--to=peff@peff.net \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pclouds@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).