-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 20.3k
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
metrics: make gauge_float64 and counter_float64 lock free #27025
Merged
Merged
Changes from 2 commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
ec7e2ed
mutex-free gaugef64 and counterf64
48f7a86
fix typos
b885cf8
atomic.Uint64 and parallel benchmarks less noisy
447a032
metrics: slight refactor
holiman 56c4c2b
metrics: make benchmark more realistic
holiman f93e493
squashme
holiman File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -1,6 +1,9 @@ | ||
package metrics | ||
|
||
import "testing" | ||
import ( | ||
"sync" | ||
"testing" | ||
) | ||
|
||
func BenchmarkCounterFloat64(b *testing.B) { | ||
c := NewCounterFloat64() | ||
|
@@ -10,6 +13,20 @@ func BenchmarkCounterFloat64(b *testing.B) { | |
} | ||
} | ||
|
||
func BenchmarkCounterFloat64Parallel(b *testing.B) { | ||
c := NewCounterFloat64() | ||
b.ResetTimer() | ||
var wg sync.WaitGroup | ||
for i := 0; i < b.N; i++ { | ||
wg.Add(1) | ||
go func(i float64) { | ||
c.Inc(i) | ||
wg.Done() | ||
}(float64(i)) | ||
} | ||
wg.Wait() | ||
} | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I think this benchmark is a bit too parallel -- I suspect there's quite some noise from just maintaining Perhaps a more realistic benchmark wold be do spin up 10 routines, and all ten routines does |
||
|
||
func TestCounterFloat64Clear(t *testing.T) { | ||
c := NewCounterFloat64() | ||
c.Inc(1.0) | ||
|
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
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
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.
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.
Why not use the new
atomic.Uint64
instead?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.
Because it would result in one extra & operation to pass it to helper functions.
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.
For the sake of clarity and adhering to what nowadays is the go-lang recommended practice, please switch to use
atomic.Uint64
instead.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.
Unless I am missing something the overhead can't be that bad (?)