-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 41
Concurrent graph modifications #321
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
Draft
razdoburdin
wants to merge
10
commits into
intel:main
Choose a base branch
from
razdoburdin:seqlock
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+804
−225
Draft
Changes from 6 commits
Commits
Show all changes
10 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
af0f8e2
initial
339d156
use shared_mutex for translator protection
0683f0c
Merge branch 'main' into seqlock
razdoburdin 0c76ef3
fix translator size calculation
d336a1f
fix silent edge drop during concurent addition
7c510e4
fix insertion into deleted translarot entry
1f3f1b2
bump clang version to clang19 for macos ci
ac6113c
bump clang version to clang20 for macos ci
ffebf9c
fix macos build
46800ff
fix silent vector loosing in concurent additions
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
For better flexibility and allow user to select syncronized/non-syncronized index kind, I would define a dedicated
SyncronizedGraphBaseclass.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am not sure this duplication is really required. Performance penalty for synchronized vs non-synchronized search is only few precents.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hi @razdoburdin, is duplication too bad in this case? Otherwise, @rfsaliev may have a point on flexibility and it's always better if performance is not affected. But agree with you that pros and cons should be discussed if duplication is a large overhead.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I plan to investigate the trade-offs, after the finalization of design of concurrent path. Let's make sure it works well first.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
To get valuable results, I would recommend to benchmark 'static' VamanaIndex with and without synchronized graph on different platforms - especially on multi-socket systems.