On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 12:45 AM Nicola Murino <nicola.mur...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > what I understand reading that issue is that sync.Pool is not the best > choice to store variable-length buffers and my first allocator > implementation accepts buffers of any size, each received packet can > have different sizes (between 20 and 262144 bytes). > > A trick I learned from the CircleMUD code base (I think!) was that you often needed a 1024 byte buffer to write to a telnet socket. So you would keep a list of those handy for fast allocation in the style of sync.Pool. If you exceeded the buffer, you would allocate a larger buffer to handle it. If you know a typical packet size, you can cut down the allocation rate by a factor of how often those packets occur. Chances are that maintaining a few pools of the correct sizes will work as well as rolling your own. My initial thought was just as to why it was rejected in the first place. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/CAGrdgiWKZ9NhEVVqBemdC3gSxsPT1jTN6q-1A0D2FHBH0wO1ww%40mail.gmail.com.
