fix: overestimating memory size in buffer #6438
Draft
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
haohuaijin
commented
Sep 23, 2024
| let slice1 = arr.slice(0, 64); | ||
| let slice2 = arr.slice(64, 64); | ||
|
|
||
| // both slices report the full buffer memory usage, even though the buffers are shared |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
because current slice1 and sclic2 not return full buffer memory usage, so delete it.
|
This is changing what these methods report to something else that I'm not sure is correct. Whilst this formulation may benefit your use-case, there are common situations where it will now under report... Perhaps you might file a ticket to discuss a memory tracking approach that better handles shared buffers, as that is the actual issue here. This is not a bug |
|
Convert to draft while we discuss the options |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Which issue does this PR close?
Closes #6363
Rationale for this change
see #6363 (comment)
What changes are included in this PR?
change the capacity function in
Bufferfrom
to
Are there any user-facing changes?
maybe no