On 4 February 2015 at 23:02, Chris Vest <[email protected]> wrote: > > > If we use official APIs, then there’s the overhead. All the pages would > now also hold on to buffers and cleaners. If I remember correctly, we > currently spend 64 bytes per page (on 32 bit JVMs, or when compressed oops > are enabled), plus some overhead from organising structures in the page > cache. This would increase a good deal. If we instead use > FileChannelImpl.map0, then the memory overhead would stay the same, and > that might be interesting. I’d have to research how it influences error > handling, though. But this only saves us a memcpy during page faults, > doesn’t it? That doesn’t sound like a big win. > > memcpy is indeed should be very fast, but you also save physical memory usage, because same disk bytes are kept in both OS file caches and your buffers.
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Neo4j" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
