I am very interested in the read-only tables feature. I have seen promising results in a microbenchmark (LuaJIT#248 (comment)) and now I am testing with a real application (Snabb).
Initial scores are low on my simplest Snabb benchmark. Baseline score is 27, merging the readonlytables branch (commit 68515a2) this drops to 7, and adding a couple of calls to table.setreadonly() that I expected to be beneficial dropped the score to 0.1. So the opening position is a 270x slowdown and I am keen to improve on this :-)
Just quick questions if I may:
- Is
readonlytables the right branch? I also see readonly_tables.
- Any loose ends in the implementation that I should be aware of?
- Any immediate idea on what could cause a performance drop even when not calling
table.setreadonly()?
Cheers!
I am very interested in the read-only tables feature. I have seen promising results in a microbenchmark (LuaJIT#248 (comment)) and now I am testing with a real application (Snabb).
Initial scores are low on my simplest Snabb benchmark. Baseline score is 27, merging the readonlytables branch (commit 68515a2) this drops to 7, and adding a couple of calls to
table.setreadonly()that I expected to be beneficial dropped the score to 0.1. So the opening position is a 270x slowdown and I am keen to improve on this :-)Just quick questions if I may:
readonlytablesthe right branch? I also seereadonly_tables.table.setreadonly()?Cheers!