-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 287
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
perf: increase min buckets on very small types #524
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
192f281
to
f637220
Compare
Also see #47 for previous discussion of this problem. |
Consider `HashSet<u8>` on x86_64 with SSE with various bucket sizes and how many bytes the allocation ends up being: | buckets | capacity | allocated bytes | | ------- | -------- | --------------- | | 4 | 3 | 36 | | 8 | 7 | 40 | | 16 | 14 | 48 | | 32 | 28 | 80 | In general, doubling the number of buckets should roughly double the number of bytes used. However, for small bucket sizes for these small TableLayouts (4 -> 8, 8 -> 16), it doesn't happen. This is an edge case which happens because of padding of the control bytes and adding the Group::WIDTH. Taking the buckets from 4 to 16 (4x) only takes the allocated bytes from 36 to 48 (~1.3x). This platform isn't the only one with edges. Here's aarch64 on an M1 for the same `HashSet<u8>`: | buckets | capacity | allocated bytes | | ------- | -------- | --------------- | | 4 | 3 | 20 | | 8 | 7 | 24 | | 16 | 14 | 40 | Notice 4 -> 8 buckets leading to only 4 more bytes (20 -> 24) instead of roughly doubling. Generalized, `buckets * table_layout.size` needs to be at least as big as `table_layout.ctrl_align`. For the cases I listed above, we'd get these new minimum bucket sizes: - x86_64 with SSE: 16 - aarch64: 8 This is a niche optimization. However, it also removes possible undefined behavior edge case in resize operations. In addition, it may be a useful property to utilize over-sized allocations (see rust-lang#523).
f637220
to
ef4df57
Compare
d00fcaa
to
c45e080
Compare
let cap = cap.max(match (Group::WIDTH, table_layout.size) { | ||
(16, 0..=1) => 14, | ||
(16, 2..=3) => 7, | ||
(8, 0..=1) => 7, | ||
_ => 3, | ||
}); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It could also be written this way. Not sure what is better:
let cap = cap.max(match (Group::WIDTH, table_layout.size) { | |
(16, 0..=1) => 14, | |
(16, 2..=3) => 7, | |
(8, 0..=1) => 7, | |
_ => 3, | |
}); | |
let cap = cap.max(match table_layout.size { | |
0..=1 if Group::WIDTH == 16 => 14, | |
2..=3 if Group::WIDTH == 16 => 7, | |
0..=1 if Group::WIDTH == 8 => 7, | |
_ => 3, | |
}); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What I had in mind was to move the max
check inside the if cap < 8
block entirely (and changing the bound to 15). Then just have hard-coded selection depending on the requested capacity and the group width/item size.
Consider
HashSet<u8>
on x86_64 with SSE with various bucket sizes and how many bytes the allocation ends up being:In general, doubling the number of buckets should roughly double the number of bytes used. However, for small bucket sizes for these small
TableLayout
s (4 -> 8, 8 -> 16), it doesn't happen. This is an edge case which happens because of padding of the control bytes and adding theGroup::WIDTH
. Taking the buckets from 4 to 16 (4x) only takes the allocated bytes from 36 to 48 (~1.3x).This platform isn't the only one with edges. Here's aarch64 on an M1 for the same
HashSet<u8>
:Notice doubling from 4 to 8 buckets only lead to 4 more bytes (20 -> 24) instead of roughly doubling.
Generalized,
buckets * table_layout.size
needs to be at least as big astable_layout.ctrl_align
. For the cases I listed above, we'd get these new minimum bucket sizes:This is a niche optimization. However, it also removes possible undefined behavior edge case in resize operations. In addition, it would be a useful property when utilizing over-sized allocations (see #523).