owner/RSE
1
1
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests 1 Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Investigate If The Filtered Object Can Be Turned Into A Struct, To Create Less GC Pressure #12

New Issue
Closed
opened 2024-11-28 09:13:06 +00:00 by owner · 1 comment
owner commented 2024-11-28 09:13:06 +00:00
Owner
Copy Link

As the title suggests, this object is quite big, and if possible, would be nice to make into a struct of sorts. Needs testing first, of cause. But we could make it so there is like an id for each different type of value.

Like "keep-alive" would equal to "15". Or "keep-alive,cache,gzip" would equal to "62".

But if that's too much work, then maybe just change where possible. Like instead of having "TlsV1.3", then just "1.3", because everyone just uses TLS anyway.

Backend/Handler/ContentFilter.cs Line 191 in d3270d3117
Filtered siteData = new()

As the title suggests, this object is quite big, and if possible, would be nice to make into a struct of sorts. Needs testing first, of cause. But we could make it so there is like an id for each different type of value. Like "keep-alive" would equal to "15". Or "keep-alive,cache,gzip" would equal to "62". But if that's too much work, then maybe just change where possible. Like instead of having "TlsV1.3", then just "1.3", because everyone just uses TLS anyway. https://git.rbwr.dk/owner/RSE/src/commit/d3270d31170be8dcd0b99cc54b70cdba210bd571/Backend/Handler/ContentFilter.cs#L191
owner added the
enhancement
investigation
 labels 2024-11-28 09:13:06 +00:00
owner changed title from Investigate If This Object Can Be Turned Into A Struct, To Create Less GC Pressure to Investigate If The Filtered Object Can Be Turned Into A Struct, To Create Less GC Pressure 2024-11-28 13:38:24 +00:00
owner added this to the Minimize GC Pressure milestone 2024-11-28 13:38:29 +00:00
owner commented 2024-12-06 09:48:23 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

After investigating, I've come to the conclusion that it wouldn't be worth it. There's too many properties that would have to be re-worked, and too many methods that would have to be reworked as well.

After investigating, I've come to the conclusion that it wouldn't be worth it. There's too many properties that would have to be re-worked, and too many methods that would have to be reworked as well.
owner closed this issue 2024-12-06 09:48:23 +00:00
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels   
bug

Something is not working

  
duplicate

This issue or pull request already exists

  
enhancement

New feature

  
help wanted

Need some help

  
invalid

Something is wrong

  
investigation

If something is working, but not as optimal as it should

  
question

More information is needed

  
wontfix

This won't be fixed

No Label
bug
duplicate
enhancement
help wanted
invalid
investigation
question
wontfix
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No Milestone
Minimize GC Pressure
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format 'yyyy-mm-dd'.

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: owner/RSE#12
No description provided.
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?