-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15
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
wip: test transport layer improvements #386
Conversation
benchmark results with #385 and #379
benchmark results with #385 and #379 and #387 (result of
|
looks like it is on par with #382. What's their difference? |
@lgarithm that is great news! this PR is meant to be the same than #382 but is just a pure merge of #385 and #379 (both passing all the tests) so before merging both of them i wanted to make sure that in the upstreaming process i did not mess up in any way i am also re-building the production containers to triple-check if we can see some improvement (or no regression) in our production workload. after that, i will merge the two linked prs in. |
d260e99
to
b5b8123
Compare
3db65f3
to
578c079
Compare
@lgarithm could you run the benchmarks with the latest commit i have added and include the results where it says note that i've cleaned-up the commit history to make sure we know which commit introduces what, so this may affect your merging/rebasing. |
98947e7
to
578c079
Compare
This commit moves the abstraction of a PTP message from a protobuf object to a fixed-size C-struct with a heap pointer. The rationale is that these PTP messages move through the system, and even when careful it is challenging to keep track of the copies allocations that protobuf is doing under the hood. In exchange, we are very explicity about the copies and allocations we do.
3f0f4d7
to
b7f0042
Compare
This PR combines:
we will merge them separately, but ideally we want to have both PRs above green, and then measure the benefits (hopefully we are on par with #382)