Removed "Meta" field from syn_registry_entry (syn_registry_by_name table) to reduce RAM usage#89
Open
emikodes wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
…me table) to halve memory footprint.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Spawning a child process currently requires the insertion of two tuples, respectively in the
syn_registry_by nameandsyn_registry_by_pidETS.In the current implementation, the
Metafield is fully duplicated in both tables:If
Metais a large piece of information, this duplication causes unnecessary memory usage.In this PR, the
syn_registry_by_nametable has been shrinked by removing theMetafield.Read operations now require a double-jump lookup:
1.Find the Pid from the Name (in syn_registry_by_name).
2.Find the Meta from the Pid (in syn_registry_by_pid).
This optimization allows to save up to 50% of the ETS Usage. Also, Write and Delete operations become marginally lighter due to less memory allocation and copying.
Executing a little "StressTest" script, which spawns 500k processes and shows the memory footprint, allows to visualize the memory reduction:
Before:
After: