-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 858
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add histogram collection benchmark #4912
Add histogram collection benchmark #4912
Conversation
@jsuereth while there are opportunities to improve, it does appear that exponential histograms currently allocate less memory than explicit bucket histograms. |
Codecov ReportBase: 91.26% // Head: 90.89% // Decreases project coverage by
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #4912 +/- ##
============================================
- Coverage 91.26% 90.89% -0.37%
+ Complexity 4886 4804 -82
============================================
Files 552 545 -7
Lines 14431 14340 -91
Branches 1373 1383 +10
============================================
- Hits 13170 13035 -135
- Misses 874 898 +24
- Partials 387 407 +20
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. ☔ View full report at Codecov. |
Please take a look @jsuereth 🙂 |
This PR was marked stale due to lack of activity. It will be closed in 14 days. |
…y-java into exp-histogram-benchmark
@jsuereth has noticed that the collection of exponential histograms has high memory churn. After looking at the code, there are a few places where we unnecessary copies of bucket count arrays. First step to improving is to benchmark current state.
The benchmark does the following:
This should make it very clear where implementation details of the histogram aggregation and temporality cause excessive memory allocation.
Here's the results on my machine: