And maybe the reuse mechanism (e.g. sync.Pool) is good for you. On Tuesday, July 21, 2020 at 1:35:14 AM UTC+8 netconn...@gmail.com wrote:
> I have an application where I will be allocating millions of data > structures, all of the same size. My program will need to run continuously > and be pretty responsive to > its network peers. > > The data is fairly static, once allocated it will rarely need to be > modified or deleted. > > In order to minimize the garbage collection scanning overhead, I was > thinking of allocating large blocks on the heap that were a fixed size that > would hold 20K or so elements > and then write a simple allocator to hand out pieces of those blocks when > needed. Instead of having to scan millions of items on the heap, the GC > would only be scanning 100 or so > items. > > Sound reasonable? Or does this 'go' against the golang way of doing > things? > > F > -- 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/6eff37cc-9d83-4735-8530-8df40b4e72d5n%40googlegroups.com.
