Re: [protobuf] Performance analysis of RepeatedField versus generated class
Option B avoids an extra copy of the data. It should work with all versions
of protocol buffers. Use it if profiling shows a lot of time spent in this
code, otherwise use whichever version you find easier to follow.
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 8:51 AM, nirajshr niraj...@gmail.com wrote:
I want to know which of the following implementation is better in
terms of performance and usability. Option A is much easier and
portable across different protobuf versions. Is it worth the trouble
trying to go with Option B? In my tests, I could not find much of a
performance gain by using Option B.
Option A uses the protobuf compiler generated class to loop through
each elements of a repeated doubles.
On the other hand, Option B uses RepeatedField class to extract a
pointer to the array of doubles.
Option A:
int size = bucket.bucketdouble(j).data_size();
double* doubleVector = new double[size];
for(int k=0; ksize; k++) {
doubleVector[k] = bucket.bucketdouble(j).data(k);
}
// Custom function that takes arrays of doubles
add_double_vector(doubleVector, size);
delete [] doubleVector;
Option B:
using namespace google::protobuf;
DoubleData* doubledata_m = deal_pb.mutable_bucket(i)-
mutable_bucketdouble(j);
RepeatedField double * doublearray_m = doubledata_m-mutable_data();
// Custom function that takes arrays of doubles
add_double_vector(doublearray_m-mutable_data(), doublearray_m-
size());
My .proto file looks something like this:
message DoubleData {
required string name = 1 [default = noname];
repeated double data = 2;
}
message Bucket {
repeated DoubleData bucketDouble = 2;
}
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Protocol Buffers group.
To post to this group, send email to proto...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comprotobuf%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com
.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Protocol Buffers group.
To post to this group, send email to proto...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en.
Re: [protobuf] Performance analysis of RepeatedField versus generated class
BTW On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 8:51 AM, nirajshr niraj...@gmail.com wrote: repeated DoubleData bucketDouble = 2; You should declare this field packed: repeated DoubleData bucketDouble = 2 [packed=true]; This will improve efficiency on the wire. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Protocol Buffers group. To post to this group, send email to proto...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en.
Re: [protobuf] Performance analysis of RepeatedField versus generated class
How about this way-more-readable variant of option B:
add_double_vector(deal_pb.bucket(i).bucketdouble().data(),
deal_pb.bucket(i).bucketdouble().size());
This assumes that add_bouble_vector only needs a const pointer. If it needs
a non-const pointer, add the appropriate mutable_ prefixes.
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 8:51 AM, nirajshr niraj...@gmail.com wrote:
I want to know which of the following implementation is better in
terms of performance and usability. Option A is much easier and
portable across different protobuf versions. Is it worth the trouble
trying to go with Option B? In my tests, I could not find much of a
performance gain by using Option B.
Option A uses the protobuf compiler generated class to loop through
each elements of a repeated doubles.
On the other hand, Option B uses RepeatedField class to extract a
pointer to the array of doubles.
Option A:
int size = bucket.bucketdouble(j).data_size();
double* doubleVector = new double[size];
for(int k=0; ksize; k++) {
doubleVector[k] = bucket.bucketdouble(j).data(k);
}
// Custom function that takes arrays of doubles
add_double_vector(doubleVector, size);
delete [] doubleVector;
Option B:
using namespace google::protobuf;
DoubleData* doubledata_m = deal_pb.mutable_bucket(i)-
mutable_bucketdouble(j);
RepeatedField double * doublearray_m = doubledata_m-mutable_data();
// Custom function that takes arrays of doubles
add_double_vector(doublearray_m-mutable_data(), doublearray_m-
size());
My .proto file looks something like this:
message DoubleData {
required string name = 1 [default = noname];
repeated double data = 2;
}
message Bucket {
repeated DoubleData bucketDouble = 2;
}
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Protocol Buffers group.
To post to this group, send email to proto...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comprotobuf%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com
.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Protocol Buffers group.
To post to this group, send email to proto...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en.
