1c41605b53fcb670f03a095a2dcc748d25ac84f9
Some checks reported errors
Tests / Clang total: 1479, passed: 1479
Clang |Total|New|Outstanding|Fixed|Trend
|:-:|:-:|:-:|:-:|:-:
|0|0|0|0|:clap:
Tests / Debug total: 1477, passed: 1477
Tests / SIMD fallback total: 1479, passed: 1479
Tests / Release [gcc] total: 1479, passed: 1479
GNU C Compiler (gcc) |Total|New|Outstanding|Fixed|Trend
|:-:|:-:|:-:|:-:|:-:
|0|0|0|0|:clap:
Tests / Release [gcc,aarch64] total: 1102, passed: 1102
Tests / Coverage total: 1111, passed: 1111
weaselab/conflict-set/pipeline/head Something is wrong with the build of this commit
Doesn't seem to affect codegen in these cases.
A data structure for optimistic concurrency control on ranges of bitwise-lexicographically-ordered keys.
Intended as an alternative to FoundationDB's skip list.
Hardware for all benchmarks is an AMD Ryzen 9 7900 with (2x32GB) 5600MT/s CL28-34-34-89 1.35V RAM
Microbenchmark
Skip list
ns/op | op/s | err% | ins/op | cyc/op | IPC | bra/op | miss% | total | benchmark |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
172.03 | 5,812,791.77 | 0.4% | 3,130.62 | 879.00 | 3.562 | 509.23 | 0.0% | 0.01 | point reads |
167.44 | 5,972,130.71 | 0.2% | 3,065.14 | 862.27 | 3.555 | 494.30 | 0.0% | 0.01 | prefix reads |
238.77 | 4,188,130.84 | 0.9% | 3,589.93 | 1,259.30 | 2.851 | 637.12 | 0.0% | 0.01 | range reads |
424.01 | 2,358,426.70 | 0.2% | 5,620.05 | 2,242.35 | 2.506 | 854.80 | 1.7% | 0.01 | point writes |
418.45 | 2,389,780.56 | 0.4% | 5,525.07 | 2,211.05 | 2.499 | 831.71 | 1.7% | 0.01 | prefix writes |
254.87 | 3,923,568.88 | 2.6% | 3,187.01 | 1,366.50 | 2.332 | 529.11 | 2.7% | 0.02 | range writes |
675.96 | 1,479,374.50 | 3.3% | 7,735.41 | 3,468.60 | 2.230 | 1,386.02 | 1.8% | 0.01 | monotonic increasing point writes |
137,986.20 | 7,247.10 | 0.6% | 789,752.33 | 699,462.00 | 1.129 | 144,824.14 | 0.0% | 0.01 | worst case for radix tree |
21.63 | 46,231,564.03 | 1.0% | 448.00 | 107.14 | 4.181 | 84.00 | 0.0% | 0.01 | create and destroy |
Radix tree (this implementation)
ns/op | op/s | err% | ins/op | cyc/op | IPC | bra/op | miss% | total | benchmark |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
17.03 | 58,732,967.93 | 0.6% | 276.28 | 87.96 | 3.141 | 52.15 | 0.4% | 0.01 | point reads |
19.52 | 51,239,158.04 | 0.3% | 367.16 | 101.50 | 3.617 | 61.92 | 0.3% | 0.01 | prefix reads |
47.74 | 20,947,676.63 | 0.5% | 998.16 | 247.43 | 4.034 | 161.64 | 0.2% | 0.01 | range reads |
23.14 | 43,207,824.89 | 0.4% | 408.18 | 121.64 | 3.356 | 70.20 | 0.3% | 0.01 | point writes |
38.02 | 26,302,115.66 | 0.1% | 709.72 | 199.70 | 3.554 | 134.26 | 0.3% | 0.01 | prefix writes |
44.28 | 22,583,559.17 | 0.9% | 825.19 | 233.10 | 3.540 | 141.48 | 0.2% | 0.01 | range writes |
85.50 | 11,695,990.63 | 0.5% | 1,488.16 | 455.68 | 3.266 | 289.22 | 0.1% | 0.01 | monotonic increasing point writes |
338,388.50 | 2,955.18 | 3.3% | 4,097,087.00 | 1,809,996.00 | 2.264 | 759,645.00 | 0.0% | 0.01 | worst case for radix tree |
84.84 | 11,787,313.59 | 1.4% | 1,716.02 | 440.50 | 3.896 | 271.00 | 0.0% | 0.01 | create and destroy |
"Real data" test
Point queries only, best of three runs. Gc ratio is the ratio of time spent doing garbage collection to time spent adding writes or doing garbage collection. Lower is better.
skip list
Check: 4.47891 seconds, 364.05 MB/s, Add: 4.55599 seconds, 123.058 MB/s, Gc ratio: 37.1145%
radix tree
Check: 1.05813 seconds, 1540.97 MB/s, Add: 1.32071 seconds, 424.508 MB/s, Gc ratio: 42.2067%
hash table
(The hash table implementation doesn't work on range queries, and its purpose is to provide an idea of how fast point queries can be)
Check: 0.804094 seconds, 2027.81 MB/s, Add: 0.652952 seconds, 858.645 MB/s, Gc ratio: 35.3885%
v0.0.13
Latest
Languages
C++
82.9%
TeX
8.1%
CMake
4.8%
Python
2.7%
Shell
0.9%
Other
0.6%