[experiment] Bitset storage - #161345
Conversation
This doesn't change any behavior and still keeps the default storage to Vec<Word>.
|
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
[experiment] Bitset storage
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)Important For more information how to resolve CI failures of this job, visit this link. |
|
Finished benchmarking commit (5384a9c): comparison URL. Overall result: ❌ regressions - please read:Benchmarking means the PR may be perf-sensitive. It's automatically marked not fit for rolling up. Overriding is possible but disadvised: it risks changing compiler perf. Next, please: If you can, justify the regressions found in this try perf run in writing along with @bors rollup=never rustc-perf Instruction countOur most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.
Max RSS (memory usage)Results (primary 2.2%, secondary 2.2%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
CyclesResults (primary 5.1%, secondary 4.8%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
Binary sizeThis perf run didn't have relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 455.183s -> 456.731s (0.34%) |
|
I tried to pick some hot DenseBitSet to use this for as a proof of concept, but it looks like the one I picked based on local measurements is not particularly impactful on rustc-perf. This was roughly 0.05% win in local cachegrind run. I'll try something else instead. |
very wip, but the early results seem promising. Opening for perf run
TODO: explain everything