Home page logo

wireshark logo Wireshark mailing list archives

Re: Interesting thing about "recent" changes in GHashTable
From: Jakub Zawadzki <darkjames-ws () darkjames pl>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 18:52:22 +0200


On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 06:15:28PM -0400, Evan Huus wrote:
Not worth it in my opinion unless the memory savings are significant (I
suspect they are only in the range of a few-hundred KB).

Yes, something like this.

Exact numbers for few:

  proto_names            21KB    3 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
  registered_dissectors   8KB   41 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
  eth_hashtable           6KB   51 insertions(+), 76 deletions(-)
  manuf_hashtable       262KB   64 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
  sub_dissectors         40KB   46 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)

  338 KB in total.

(test patches: http://www.wireshark.org/~darkjames/ghashtable-set/)
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe

  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]