Hi Xiang, | Algorithm | 4k | 8k | 16k | 32k | 64k | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | lz4hc(MTv5) | 6.44 | 6.71 | 5.64 | 5.18 | 4.71 | | lz4hc(MTv3) | 9.36 | 8.31 | 8.27 | 8.54 | 6.94 | | lz4hc(ST) | 4.40 | 5.77 | 3.65 | 5.45 | 3.36 | | zstd(MTv5) | 6.85 | 6.47 | 5.99 | 6.11 | 6.16 | | zstd(MTv3) | 9.26 | 8.68 | 8.89 | 8.11 | 7.94 | | zstd(ST) | 5.23 | 4.52 | 4.62 | 4.11 | 4.02 | | lzma(MTv5) | 21.92 | 23.43 | 23.82 | 24.92 | 26.74 | | lzma(MTv3) | 23.72 | 24.79 | 25.90 | 26.92 | 27.77 | | lzma(ST) | 56.37 | 65.06 | 71.07 | 74.69 | 81.63 |
Please find the new benchmark times for this patch. I profiled the extraction process, and found out there was some bottleneck for using `calloc` calls. I have switched them to `malloc`. And with some optimisation, I am seeing a ~2 sec improvement from our previous baseline. I will share profiling data shortly. Please let me know your thoughts on this. Thanks, Nithurshen
