-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.5k
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
More scalable pool allocator #50137
More scalable pool allocator #50137
Conversation
b01d688
to
369ced8
Compare
With all the changes since the beginning, are the benchmarks still the same? |
65a2b4d
to
2983c05
Compare
On 2983c05:
|
that looks pretty good! |
Seeing some regressions on this PR on the single-threaded benchmarks. Marking as draft until further investigated. |
Benchmarks look fine on the latest commit (the goal of this PR is be performance-neutral on the serial benchmarks and to provide better scalability when there are multiple threads allocating). Serial benchmarks (master)
Serial benchmarks (PR)
Multithreaded benchmarks (master)
Multithreaded benchmarks (PR)
Machine information
|
4fe05fa
to
acb4110
Compare
@nanosoldier |
Your package evaluation job has completed - possible new issues were detected. |
This made the |
Yeah it's on my to-do list |
Also taking a look at this. |
…ect pool freelist * addresses follow-up comments from #50137, particularly #50137 (comment)
Still very experimental and depends on #49644. Mostly for later comparisons with #48969 (e.g. if concurrent sweeping would perform better on a potentially less contended pool allocator).
Seems to perform better than master on some multithreaded allocation benchmarks (e.g.
tree_mutable.jl
), but a lot more benchmarking is needed: