http://codereview.chromium.org/1563005/diff/12001/13008 File src/runtime.cc (right):
http://codereview.chromium.org/1563005/diff/12001/13008#newcode10071 src/runtime.cc:10071: int target_index = (finger_index > kEntriesIndex) ? finger_index - 2 Thinking more about it. Looks like everything should be fine if I both iterate backwards and evict post finger entry---that would give LRU for both partial and full caches, correct? I'll implement it, if this CL still has a chance. On 2010/04/08 17:50:14, antonm wrote:
On 2010/04/08 17:04:28, Lasse Reichstein wrote: > We fill up from left to right, and then evict right-to-left. > Seems more consistent to evict the element after the finger instead.
I might be missing something, but I hoped to implement LRU eviction
policy for
the case when keys rotate in a loop which is bigger than cache.
But I am not insisting.
http://codereview.chromium.org/1563005/show -- v8-dev mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.
