Boost Users :
Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [Multi-index] hash_unique memory consumption vs std::map
From: Joaquin M Lopez Munoz (joaquin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-11-05 16:18:36
Michael Fawcett <michael.fawcett <at> gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 3:22 PM, Joaquin M Lopez Munoz <joaquin <at> tid.es
> > Can you declare some iterator "it" to the hashed index and
> > evaluate the following expression
> > sizeof(*(it.get_node()));
> > and compare with
> > sizeof(id_attribute_pair_type)
> You're right. The first prints out 32, the second prints out 24.
You're in a 32-bit platform, right? Then, the first sizeof()
should ideally be 24+4=28, not 32. I think you're having a padding
issue due to the presence of a long type in id_attribute_pair_type.
Can you try changing the order in which long and _variant_t
are declared within id_attribute_pair_type? This might avoid
padding and get you a sizeof(*(it.get_node()))=28. If not, well,
we're out of luck.
> In my test graph there are 106,096 edges in the graph. Each edge
> has 22 attributes.
> In the hashed_index case, this results in a bucket_array with
> bucket_count() == 23 and 8 bytes overhead per node with a node (in my
> case) at 24 bytes. So that means 106,096 * 23 * 32 == 78,086,656
Not entirely correct. The right formula is
which in our case is
106,096*(22*32 + 23*4) = 84,452,416
> In the std::map case, this results in 22 nodes at 12 bytes overhead
> per node. 106,096 * 22 * 36 == 84,028,032 bytes.
Not consistent with the previous calculation and your reported
saving of 1% in memory consumption :-/ Also, you might want to
investigate whether the overhead for std::map is 12 bytes per
element or 16 bytes per element --the latter is more likely.
JoaquÃn M LÃ³pez MuÃ±oz
TelefÃ³nica, InvestigaciÃ³n y Desarrollo
Boost-users list run by williamkempf at hotmail.com, kalb at libertysoft.com, bjorn.karlsson at readsoft.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, wekempf at cox.net