swebb2066 merged PR #377:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4cxx/pull/377
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
swebb2066 opened a new pull request, #377:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4cxx/pull/377
This PR enables a higher rate at which logging events to be sent through
AsyncAppender by avoiding some lock contention inside the `bufferNotEmpty`
swebb2066 commented on PR #335:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4cxx/pull/335#issuecomment-1945241687
Fixed benchmarks show the simpler lock_guard synchronization is more
performant then an AtomicList using std::atomic.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git
swebb2066 closed pull request #335: Improve AsyncAppender throughput
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4cxx/pull/335
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To
swebb2066 commented on PR #335:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4cxx/pull/335#issuecomment-1945194623
Benchmark measurements were incorrent - did not measure AsyncAppender
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to
swebb2066 commented on PR #335:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4cxx/pull/335#issuecomment-1907352421
Benchmarks show the simpler `lock_guard` synchronization is as
performant as an `AtomicList `using `std::atomic.`
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
swebb2066 closed pull request #335: Improve AsyncAppender throughput
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4cxx/pull/335
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To
swebb2066 commented on PR #335:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4cxx/pull/335#issuecomment-1907209492
> I don't see a corresponding delete anyplace, am I missing it?
The Node delete is in dispatch at line 574. Raw pointers are used because
`std::atomic` only works when T is
rm5248 commented on code in PR #335:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4cxx/pull/335#discussion_r1464097310
##
src/main/cpp/asyncappender.cpp:
##
@@ -96,6 +96,59 @@ typedef std::map DiscardMap;
}
#endif
+#define USE_ATOMIC_QUEUE 1
+#if USE_ATOMIC_QUEUE
+#include
swebb2066 commented on PR #335:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4cxx/pull/335#issuecomment-1905086551
Relevant Ubuntu gcc 9 benchmarks improve from:
| Benchmark | Time | CPU | Iterations |
| | -- | | --- |
| Async, int value using
swebb2066 opened a new pull request, #335:
URL: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4cxx/pull/335
This PR aims to reduce synchronization contention when logging through
AsynicAppender.
Relevant Windows benchmarks improve from:
| Benchmark | Time | CPU | Iterations |
|
11 matches
Mail list logo
