When sorting update commands add Deleted + Inserted number of edges instead of Deleted * Inserted #26082
Conversation
| { | ||
| return edgeList; | ||
| return edges is IEnumerable<TEdge> edgeList ? edgeList : (new TEdge[] { (TEdge)edges! }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This seems like it would allocate more if GetEdges is called multiple times for the same two vertices - is this intentional (e.g. because we never do that?).
We can also continue returnining a List<TEdge> to keep the typing simpler - the perf difference between a bare array and a List<T> is very unlikely to matter.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This seems like it would allocate more if GetEdges is called multiple times for the same two vertices - is this intentional (e.g. because we never do that?).
Yes, it's only called during cycle breaking
We can also continue returnining a List to keep the typing simpler - the perf difference between a bare array and a List is very unlikely to matter.
Can you make it a suggestion? I don't understand how it's simpler
|
Turning pooling off doesn't have a significant effect on the results
|
…nstead of Deleted * Inserted Don't allocate a collection for edges if there's only one edge between given two vertices Reuse the Multigraph instance
AndriySvyryd
force-pushed
the
FasterSave
branch
from
16c2385
to
93f94a1
Compare
|
Great! |
|
@Pilchie for approval |
|
Approved for EFCore 6. |
AndriySvyryd
changed the title
Description
#25952 decreased throughput in mixed update scenario by about 20-40%. These changes mostly remove this degradation:
MultigraphinstanceBefore #25952
After #25952
After this fix
Customer Impact
SaveChangeswith mixed deletes and inserts is significantly slower.How found
Automated benchmarks
Test coverage
Already covered
Regression?
Yes, from 6.0-rc1
Risk
Low, no functional changes.