improve defaultSize adjustment for rare case when next few j > 0 p.calls after sort #23
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
improve defaultSize adjustment for rare case when next few j > 0 p.calls after sort (==> a) have a[j].calls ~= a[0].calls and some of them a[j].size > defaultSize (== a[0].size) + added test TestPoolCalibrateWithAdjustment
For example, if we have after sort.Sort(a):
bytebufferpool/pool.go
Line 118 in 9ccb276
a[0].calls = 42001, a[0].size = 512
a[1].calls = 40000, a[0].size = 1024
Before this commit we use
512
as newp.defaultSize
and in this commit we use1024
as newp.defaultSize
, what may prevent very rare case, when in 40000 new allocations out of 82000 we have additional memory allocation for b.B byappend
after initial allocation bypool.New
in price of additional allocated memory for all another allocations, include top512
sizesNearness of the a[j].calls to the initial a[0].calls is adjusted by the
calibrateDefaultSizeAdjustmentsSpread
andcalibrateDSASGcd
constantsSorry for my bad English