Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

ref: Move packet building into conn #1016

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 16, 2023
Merged

ref: Move packet building into conn #1016

merged 1 commit into from
May 16, 2023

Conversation

rklaehn
Copy link
Contributor

@rklaehn rklaehn commented May 15, 2023

As suggested by @ramfox in #830 (comment)

This undoes a lot of the changes to tests that were done in the initial batching PR. The packetize and packet split iter moved to the conn.

@rklaehn rklaehn requested a review from dignifiedquire May 15, 2023 16:12
@dignifiedquire
Copy link
Contributor

I am not seeing any place where the packets are split on receiving, did you miss that piece?

@rklaehn
Copy link
Contributor Author

rklaehn commented May 15, 2023

I am not seeing any place where the packets are split on receiving, did you miss that piece?

I did not change anything about this. It is in process_derp_read_result. The only remaining place where PacketSplitIter is still used.

@dignifiedquire
Copy link
Contributor

ahh, right :)

@dignifiedquire
Copy link
Contributor

did you test performance? I assume no change?

@rklaehn
Copy link
Contributor Author

rklaehn commented May 16, 2023

did you test performance? I assume no change?

I did not test perf. It does the same thing, just in a different place. Same number of allocations etc.

Although to be fair I think we are not at the point where we have to worry about allocations. Hopefully we will get there eventually...

@rklaehn rklaehn merged commit 3142912 into x-hp May 16, 2023
@rklaehn rklaehn deleted the move-batching-to-conn branch May 16, 2023 05:41
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants