On Thu, 29 Oct 2020 18:02:47 GMT, Xue-Lei Andrew Fan <xue...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>>> > Benchmarking is probably hard because we don't know the average occupancy >>> > of the map. >>> >>> I agreed. No matter what the default value is, it will not fit perfectly in >>> all situations. The value 1 may be fit for small workload applications, but >>> not good for big workload applications. Applications could use the size >>> setting APIs for the tuning. For this update, I think the impact for >>> various workload may be limited/acceptable, but I'm not very sure of it. >>> Benchmarking data with various workload would help us for a better sense. >> >> But we did run with `1` for quite a long time without somebody complaining :) > >> > > Benchmarking is probably hard because we don't know the average >> > > occupancy of the map. >> > >> > >> > I agreed. No matter what the default value is, it will not fit perfectly >> > in all situations. The value 1 may be fit for small workload applications, >> > but not good for big workload applications. Applications could use the >> > size setting APIs for the tuning. For this update, I think the impact for >> > various workload may be limited/acceptable, but I'm not very sure of it. >> > Benchmarking data with various workload would help us for a better sense. >> >> But we did run with `1` for quite a long time without somebody complaining :) > > Yes, I think it is a safe update and looks good to me. I believe the impact > should be minimal. But normally, I would like to check with a test for sure. > If no regression test, an explain with noreg tag may be needed. External > testing, like a confirmation of no performance regression any longer in an > existing application, is fine. > > I don't want to block this integration, please go ahead if you are confident > with it. I added the noreg-hard label to the JBS bug. I'll wait for any further input til monday, before integration. @XueleiFan would be nice if you could approve then, too :) ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/937
