Re: MPS: weak hash tables

["Gerd Möllmann" <gerd.moellmann@gmail.com>]

Helmut Eller <eller.helmut@gmail.com> writes:

> On Sat, Jul 06 2024, Gerd Möllmann wrote:
>
>>> finishes and requires 41.82 seconds compared to the 12.26 of the non-MPS
>>> version.  And it uses something like 2.8 GB compared to 350 MB of the
>>> non-MPS version (estimated by looking at the RES column in top).
>
> Scratch that.  That had some MPS_KEY_COMMIT_LIMIT in there.
>
>> So 1000 is probably to high for that that use case, or 0.1s is too low,
>> especially in batch mode. Grmpf. Could you try with 100 instead of 1000?
>
> This is should be better:
>
> N	Seconds	RES
> 1	65.10	920MB
> 10      49.59   1GB
> 50      45.75   1.4GB
> 100     43.50   2.8GB
> 500     42.14   2.6GB
> 1000    41.98   2.6GB
>
> As before the RES column is what I saw in top (sampled every 3 seconds).

Thanks! I've made it so that in batch mode we don't put a time limit on
processing messages because that made no sense.

Hm. Don't know how to do better at the moement. The message passing
itself is of course costly.