Reduce the number of branches in NodeEncoder #211
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
Ostrzyciel
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 8, 2024
In some cases it was indeed faster, but most of the time, this is slower... This reverts commit e508ee5.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Yet another experiment in the NodeEncoder which could improve performance.
This focuses on removing as many branches from the code as possible through 2 optimizations:
newEntryfield in lookup entries and instead ofgetOrAddEntryuse the splitgetEntryandaddEntry. This API, although less elegant, does reduce the number of branches by 1, because we have to check if the entry is new or not only once, instead of twice. This also makes it so that we can store just one integer in the hashmap per entry, instead of an object with 3 fields. This should help with memory bandwidth slightly.lastId + 1 == id ? 0 : id. It should help, especially because these branches were close to returns.