From: vmakarov@... Date: 2016-11-05T21:16:37+00:00 Subject: [ruby-core:78005] [Ruby trunk Feature#12142] Hash tables with open addressing Issue #12142 has been updated by Vladimir Makarov. Yura Sokolov wrote: > my st_table code is much shorter and simpler. > > https://github.com/funny-falcon/ruby/blob/st_table_with_array5/st.c#L136-L1023 > https://github.com/vnmakarov/ruby/blob/hash_tables_with_open_addressing/st.c#L301-L1616 > > My version has 519 meaningful lines of code (ie removing comments and single braces), > and Vlad's version has 731 meaniningful LOC. > > Why Vlad's version is simpler? I think measuring lines after removing comments and single braces to define what is simpler is not an accurate approach: - I suspect you did not count tables definining hash tables growth. In my variant, it is in st.c. In yours, it is in files st*.inc. And that is about 90 lines alone. - I have more sophisticated function checking hash table consistency. It proved to be very usefull in my debugging. My variant of the function is 30 lines longer. In my variant, the call looks like: #ifdef ST_DEBUG st_check(tab); #endif In yours, you add non-debug variant (empty macro) and the call looks like st_check(tab); And it adds about 40 lines to my code. I think it is a matter of taste. I prefer to have possibility to switch on checking in one particular place. Also I have 30 more asserts than you. I use it frequently also for documentation of expected conditions. - Your code has if (values >= values_end) break; mine always only if (values == values_end) break; - I have tendency to use longer identifiers (I found them useful for long maintenance as their names are a part of documentation. IMHO choosing the right names is very important part of coding). Using longer names means sometimes longer lines which should be splitted. - Using more functions called once helps code understanding in many cases but it increases # of lines. I could continue but I stop. So in my opinion your definition of simplicity is very inaccurate. ---------------------------------------- Feature #12142: Hash tables with open addressing https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/12142#change-61345 * Author: Vladimir Makarov * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * Assignee: ---------------------------------------- ~~~ Hello, the following patch contains a new implementation of hash tables (major files st.c and include/ruby/st.h). Modern processors have several levels of cache. Usually,the CPU reads one or a few lines of the cache from memory (or another level of cache). So CPU is much faster at reading data stored close to each other. The current implementation of Ruby hash tables does not fit well to modern processor cache organization, which requires better data locality for faster program speed. The new hash table implementation achieves a better data locality mainly by o switching to open addressing hash tables for access by keys. Removing hash collision lists lets us avoid *pointer chasing*, a common problem that produces bad data locality. I see a tendency to move from chaining hash tables to open addressing hash tables due to their better fit to modern CPU memory organizations. CPython recently made such switch (https://hg.python.org/cpython/file/ff1938d12240/Objects/dictobject.c). PHP did this a bit earlier https://nikic.github.io/2014/12/22/PHPs-new-hashtable-implementation.html. GCC has widely-used such hash tables (https://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk/libiberty/hashtab.c) internally for more than 15 years. o removing doubly linked lists and putting the elements into an array for accessing to elements by their inclusion order. That also removes pointer chaising on the doubly linked lists used for traversing elements by their inclusion order. A more detailed description of the proposed implementation can be found in the top comment of the file st.c. The new implementation was benchmarked on 21 MRI hash table benchmarks for two most widely used targets x86-64 (Intel 4.2GHz i7-4790K) and ARM (Exynos 5410 - 1.6GHz Cortex-A15): make benchmark-each ITEM=bm_hash OPTS='-r 3 -v' COMPARE_RUBY='' Here the results for x86-64: hash_aref_dsym 1.094 hash_aref_dsym_long 1.383 hash_aref_fix 1.048 hash_aref_flo 1.860 hash_aref_miss 1.107 hash_aref_str 1.107 hash_aref_sym 1.191 hash_aref_sym_long 1.113 hash_flatten 1.258 hash_ident_flo 1.627 hash_ident_num 1.045 hash_ident_obj 1.143 hash_ident_str 1.127 hash_ident_sym 1.152 hash_keys 2.714 hash_shift 2.209 hash_shift_u16 1.442 hash_shift_u24 1.413 hash_shift_u32 1.396 hash_to_proc 2.831 hash_values 2.701 The average performance improvement is more 50%. ARM results are analogous -- no any benchmark performance degradation and about the same average improvement. The patch can be seen as https://github.com/vnmakarov/ruby/compare/trunk...hash_tables_with_open_addressing.patch or in a less convenient way as pull request changes https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/1264/files This is my first patch for MRI and may be my proposal and implementation have pitfalls. But I am keen to learn and work on inclusion of this code into MRI. ~~~ ---Files-------------------------------- st-march31.patch (114 KB) base.patch (93.8 KB) hash.patch (4.48 KB) strong_hash.patch (8.08 KB) city.patch (19.4 KB) new-hash-table-benchmarks.patch (1.34 KB) size16.png (6.91 KB) size256.png (6.95 KB) size60000.png (7.59 KB) st_table_array.mbox (102 KB) st_table_array2.mbox (102 KB) st_table_array4.mbox (89.5 KB) -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ Unsubscribe: