Skip to content
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

eliminate allocations from InboundFrame #848

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 25, 2020

Conversation

bollhals
Copy link
Contributor

Proposed Changes

Eliminates all allocations for InboundFrame by converting it into a readonly struct.

Types of Changes

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes issue #NNNN)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause an observable behavior change in existing systems)
  • Documentation improvements (corrections, new content, etc)
  • Cosmetic change (whitespace, formatting, etc)

Checklist

  • I have read the CONTRIBUTING.md document
  • I have signed the CA (see https://cla.pivotal.io/sign/rabbitmq)
  • All tests pass locally with my changes
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • I have added necessary documentation (if appropriate)
  • Any dependent changes have been merged and published in related repositories

@bollhals
Copy link
Contributor Author

For @stebet test case, drops the ~7 MB allocation (~10%) for InboundFrame.

image

@michaelklishin michaelklishin merged commit 2bf5849 into rabbitmq:master May 25, 2020
michaelklishin added a commit that referenced this pull request May 25, 2020
eliminate allocations from InboundFrame

(cherry picked from commit 2bf5849)
@michaelklishin
Copy link
Member

Backported to 6.x. Thank you!

@lukebakken lukebakken added this to the 6.1.0 milestone May 26, 2020
@lukebakken lukebakken self-assigned this May 26, 2020
@bollhals bollhals deleted the reduce.allocation branch March 2, 2021 20:51
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants