Motivation:
Using the Cleaner to release the native memory has a few drawbacks:
- Cleaner.clean() uses static synchronized internally which means it can be a performance bottleneck
- It put more load on the GC
Modifications:
Add new buffer implementations that can be enabled with a system flag as optimizations. In this case no Cleaner is used at all and the user must ensure everything is always released.
Result:
Less performance impact by direct buffers when need to be allocated and released.
Motivation:
At the moment the user is responsible to increase the writer index of the composite buffer when a new component is added. We should add some methods that handle this for the user as this is the most popular usage of the composite buffer.
Modifications:
Add new methods that autoamtically increase the writerIndex when buffers are added.
Result:
Easier usage of CompositeByteBuf.
Motivation:
We missed to override a few methods and so some actions on the ByteBuf failed.
Modifications:
- Override all methods
- Add unit tests to ensure all is fixed.
Result:
All *LeakAware*ByteBuf have correct implementations
Motivation:
Some tests in PooledByteBufAllocatorTest are blocking on a CountDownLatch. We should use a timeout on these tests so these will not block forever on a failure.
Modifications:
Add timeout param to @Test annotation
Result:
Have sane timeouts on tests.
Motivation:
DefaultByteBufHolder.equals(...) and hashCode() should be implemented so it works correctly with instances that share the same content.
Modifications:
Add implementations and a unit-test.
Result:
Have correctly working equals(...) and hashCode() method
Related: #4333#4421#5128
Motivation:
slice(), duplicate() and readSlice() currently create a non-recyclable
derived buffer instance. Under heavy load, an application that creates a
lot of derived buffers can put the garbage collector under pressure.
Modifications:
- Add the following methods which creates a non-recyclable derived buffer
- retainedSlice()
- retainedDuplicate()
- readRetainedSlice()
- Add the new recyclable derived buffer implementations, which has its
own reference count value
- Add ByteBufHolder.retainedDuplicate()
- Add ByteBufHolder.replace(ByteBuf) so that..
- a user can replace the content of the holder in a consistent way
- copy/duplicate/retainedDuplicate() can delegate the holder
construction to replace(ByteBuf)
- Use retainedDuplicate() and retainedSlice() wherever possible
- Miscellaneous:
- Rename DuplicateByteBufTest to DuplicatedByteBufTest (missing 'D')
- Make ReplayingDecoderByteBuf.reject() return an exception instead of
throwing it so that its callers don't need to add dummy return
statement
Result:
Derived buffers are now recycled when created via retainedSlice() and
retainedDuplicate() and derived from a pooled buffer
Motivation:
PooledByteBufAllocatorTest.testNumThreadCachesWithNoDirrectArenas() had a race as it just used LockSupport.parkNanos(). We should better use a CountdownLatch and so be sure we really have init everything.
Modifications:
Replace LockSupport.parkNanos(...) with CountdownLatch usage
Result:
No more race in test.
Motivation:
When FixedCompositeByteBuf was constructed with new ByteBuf[0] and IndexOutOfboundsException was thrown.
Modifications:
Fix constructor
Result:
No more exception
Motivation:
We should not cache the SwappedByteBuf in AbstractByteBuf to reduce the memory footprint.
Modifications:
Not cache the SwappedByteBuf.
Result:
Less memory footprint.
Motivation:
ByteBuf.readBytes(...) uses Unpooled.buffer(...) internally which will use a heap ByteBuf and also not able to make use of the allocator which may be pooled. We should better make use of the allocator.
Modifications:
Use the allocator for thenew buffer.
Result:
Take allocator into account when copy bytes.
Motivation:
When a PoolChunk needs to get moved to the previous PoolChunkList because of the minUsage / maxUsage constraints we always just moved it one level which is incorrect and so could lead to have PoolChunks in the wrong PoolChunkList (in respect to their minUsage / maxUsage settings). This then could have the effect that PoolChunks are not released / freed in a timely fashion and so.
Modifications:
- Correctly move PoolChunks between PoolChunkLists, which includes moving it multiple "levels".
- Add unit test
Result:
Correctlty move the PoolChunk to PoolChunkList when it is freed, even if its multiple layers.
Motivation:
The PoolChunkList.minUsage() and maxUsage() needs to take special action to translate Integer.MIN_VALUE / MAX_VALUE as these are used internal for tail and head of the linked-list structure.
Modifications:
- Correct the minUsage() and maxUsage() methods.
- Add unit test.
Result:
Correct metrics
Motivation:
The method setBytes creates temporary heap buffer when source buffer is read-only.
But this temporary buffer is not used correctly and may lead to data corruption.
This problem occurs when target buffer is pooled and temporary buffer
arrayOffset() is not zero.
Modifications:
Use correct arrayOffset when calling PlatformDependent.copyMemory.
Unit test was added to test this case.
Result:
Setting buffer content works correctly when target is pooled buffer and source
is read-only ByteBuffer.
Motivation:
My previous commit b88a980482 introduced a flawed unit test,
that executes an assertion in a different thread than the test thread.
If this assertion fails, the test doesn't fail.
Modifications:
Replace the assertion by a proper workaround.
Result:
More correct unit test
Motivation:
Circular assignment of arenas to thread caches can lead to less than optimal
mappings in cases where threads are (frequently) shutdown and started.
Example Scenario:
There are a total of 2 arenas. The first two threads performing an allocation
would lead to the following mapping:
Thread 0 -> Arena 0
Thread 1 -> Arena 1
Now, assume Thread 1 is shut down and another Thread 2 is started. The current
circular assignment algorithm would lead to the following mapping:
Thread 0 -> Arena 0
Thread 2 -> Arena 0
Ideally, we want Thread 2 to use Arena 1 though.
Presumably, this is not much of an issue for most Netty applications that do all
the allocations inside the eventloop, as eventloop threads are seldomly shut down
and restarted. However, applications that only use the netty-buffer package
or implement their own threading model outside the eventloop might suffer from
increased contention. For example, gRPC Java when using the blocking stub
performs some allocations outside the eventloop and within its own thread pool
that is dynamically sized depending on system load.
Modifications:
Implement a linear scan algorithm that assigns a new thread cache to the arena
that currently backs the fewest thread caches.
Result:
Closer to ideal mappings between thread caches and arenas. In order to always
get an ideal mapping, we would have to re-balance the mapping whenever a thread
dies. However, that's difficult because of deallocation.
Motivation
See ##3229
Modifications:
Add methods with position independent FileChannel calls to ByteBuf and its subclasses.
Results:
The user can use these new methods to read/write ByteBuff without updating FileChannel's position.
Motivation:
f750d6e36c added support for surrogates in the writeUtf8 conversion. However exceptions are thrown if invalid input is detected, but the JDK (and slow path of writeUtf8) uses a replacement character and does not throw. We should behave the same way.
Modificiations:
- Don't throw in ByteBufUtil.writeUtf8, and instead use a replacement character consistent with the JDK
Result:
ByteBufUtil.writeUtf8 behavior is consistent with the JDK UTF_8 conversion.
Motivation:
There are a few buffer leaks related to how Unpooled.wrapped and Base64.encode is used.
Modifications:
- Fix usages of Bas64.encode to correct leaks
- Clarify interface of Unpooled.wrapped* to ensure reference count ownership is clearly defined.
Result:
Reference count code is more clearly defined and less leaks are possible.
Motivation:
UTF-16 can not represent the full range of Unicode characters, and thus has the concept of Surrogate Pair (http://unicode.org/glossary/#surrogate_pair) where 2 16-bit code units can be used to represent the missing characters. ByteBufUtil.writeUtf8 is currently does not support this and is thus incomplete.
Modifications:
- Add support for surrogate pairs in ByteBufUtil.writeUtf8
Result:
ByteBufUtil.writeUtf8 now supports surrogate pairs and is correctly converting to UTF-8.
Motivation:
We missed to check if the dst is ready only before using unsafe to copy data into it which lead to data-corruption. We need to ensure we respect ready only ByteBuffer.
Modifications:
- Correctly check if the dst is ready only before copy data into it in UnsafeByteBufUtil
- Also make it work for buffers that are not direct and not have an array
Result:
No more data corruption possible if the dst buffer is readonly and unsafe buffer implementation is used.
As discussed in #3209, this PR adds Little Endian accessors
to ByteBuf and descendants.
Corresponding accessors were added to UnsafeByteBufUtil,
HeapByteBufferUtil to avoid calling `reverseBytes`.
Deprecate `order()`, `order(buf)` and `SwappedByteBuf`.
Motivation:
The method setBytes did not work correctly because read-only ByteBuffer
does not allow access to its underlying array.
Modifications:
New case was added for ByteBuffer's that are not direct and do not have an array.
These must be handled by copying the data into a temporary array. Unit test was
added to test this case.
Result:
It is now possible to use read-only ByteBuffer as the source
for the setBytes method.
Motivation:
Fix a race condition that was introduced by f18990a8a5 that could lead to a NPE when allocate from the PooledByteBufAllocator concurrently by many threads.
Modifications:
Correctly synchronize on the PoolSubPage head.
Result:
No more race.
Motivation:
SlicedByteBuf did double reference count checking for various bulk operations, which affects performance.
Modifications:
- Add package private method to AbstractByteBuf that can be used to check indexes without check the reference count
- Use this new method in the bulk operation os SlicedByteBuf as the reference count checks take place on the wrapped buffer anyway
- Fix test-case to not try to read data that is out of the bounds of the buffer.
Result:
Better performance on bulk operations when using SlicedByteBuf (and sub-classes)
Motivation:
Some of the tests in the buffer module contained unused code. Some of the tests also used unnecessary inheritance which could be avoided to simplify code.
Modifications:
Cleanup the test cases.
Result:
Cleaner code, less cruft.
Motivation:
We need to always return a real slice even when the requested length is 0. This is needed as otherwise we not correctly share the reference count and so may leak a buffer if the user call release() on the returned slice and expect it to decrement the reference count of the "parent" buffer.
Modifications:
- Always return a real slice
- Add unit test for the bug.
Result:
No more leak possible when a user requests a slice of length 0 of a SlicedByteBuf.
Motivation:
Calling AbstractByteBuf.toString(..., Charset) is used quite frequently by users but produce a lot of GC.
Modification:
- Use a FastThreadLocal to store the CharBuffer that are needed for decoding.
- Use internalNioBuffer(...) when possible
Result:
Less object creation / Less GC
Motivation:
ByteBufUtil.writeUtf8(...) / writeUsAscii(...) can use a fast-path when writing into AbstractByteBuf. We should try to unwrap WrappedByteBuf implementations so
we are able to do the same on wrapped AbstractByteBuf instances.
Modifications:
- Try to unwrap WrappedByteBuf to use the fast-path
Result:
Faster writing of utf8 and usascii for WrappedByteBuf instances.
Motivation:
As toString() is often used while logging we need to ensure this produces no exception.
Modifications:
Ensure we never throw an IllegalReferenceCountException.
Result:
Be able to log without produce exceptions.
Motivation:
The logic in ByteBufUtilTest.ByteBufUtilTest is wrong. It is attempting to ensure at least 1 byte is different in the ranges that will be subsequently compared, but does so before the copy operation.
Modifications:
- Move the code which ensures there is a difference to after the copy
- Simplify the logic which ensures there is a difference
Result:
Unit test now operates as designed.
Motivation:
ByteBufUtilTest.notEqualsBufferSubsections is testing non-equality but just uses random numbers to assume they will not be equal. Even after the random bytes are generated we should check they are infact not equal so the test has no chance of failing when it should not.
Modifications:
- Loop through bytes in notEqualsBufferSubsections after they are randomly generated to ensure there is atleast 1 difference.
Result:
More reliable unit tests.
Motivation:
We need to ensure all markers are reset when doing an allocation via the PooledByteBufAllocator. This was not the always the case.
Modifications:
Move all logic that needs to get executed when reuse a PooledByteBuf into one place and call it.
Result:
Correct behavior
Motivation:
When AsciiString is used we can optimize the write operation done by ByteBufUtil.writeUsAscii(...)
Modifications:
Sepcial handle AsciiString.
Result:
Faster writing of AsciiString.
Motiviation:
The current read loops don't fascilitate reading a maximum amount of bytes. This capability is useful to have more fine grain control over how much data is injested.
Modifications:
- Add a setMaxBytesPerRead(int) and getMaxBytesPerRead() to ChannelConfig
- Add a setMaxBytesPerIndividualRead(int) and getMaxBytesPerIndividualRead to ChannelConfig
- Add methods to RecvByteBufAllocator so that a pluggable scheme can be used to control the behavior of the read loop.
- Modify read loop for all transport types to respect the new RecvByteBufAllocator API
Result:
The ability to control how many bytes are read for each read operation/loop, and a more extensible read loop.
Motivation:
FixedCompositeByteBuf does not properly implement a number of methods for
copying its content to direct buffers and output streams
Modifications:
Replace improper use of capacity() with readableBytes() when computing offesets during writes
Result:
Copying works correctly
Motivation:
When allocate a PooledByteBuf we need to ensure to also reset the markers for the readerIndex and writerIndex.
Modifications:
- Correct reset the markers
- Add test-case for it
Result:
Correctly reset markers.
Motivation:
CompositeByteBuf.iterator() currently creates a new ArrayList and fill it with the ByteBufs, which is more expensive then it needs to be.
Modifications:
- Use special Iterator implementation
Result:
Less overhead when calling iterator()
Motivation:
The usage and code within AsciiString has exceeded the original design scope for this class. Its usage as a binary string is confusing and on the verge of violating interface assumptions in some spots.
Modifications:
- ByteString will be created as a base class to AsciiString. All of the generic byte handling processing will live in ByteString and all the special character encoding will live in AsciiString.
Results:
The AsciiString interface will be clarified. Users of AsciiString can now be clear of the limitations the class imposes while users of the ByteString class don't have to live with those limitations.
Motivation:
The DefaultHttp2ConnectionDecoder class is calling verifyPrefaceReceived() for almost every frame event at all times.
The Http2ConnectionHandler class is calling readClientPrefaceString() on every decode event.
Modifications:
- DefaultHttp2ConnectionDecoder should not have to continuously call verifyPrefaceReceived() because it transitions boolean state 1 time for each connection.
- Http2ConnectionHandler should not have to continuously call readClientPrefaceString() because it transitions boolean state 1 time for each connection.
Result:
- Less conditional checks for the mainstream usage of the connection.
Motivation:
At the moment we have two problems:
- CompositeByteBuf.addComponent(...) will not add the supplied buffer to the CompositeByteBuf if its empty, which means it will not be released on CompositeByteBuf.release() call. This is a problem as a user will expect everything added will be released (the user not know we not added it).
- CompositeByteBuf.addComponents(...) will either add no buffers if none is readable and so has the same problem as addComponent(...) or directly release the ByteBuf if at least one ByteBuf is readable. Again this gives inconsistent handling and may lead to memory leaks.
Modifications:
- Always add the buffer to the CompositeByteBuf and so release it on release call.
Result:
Consistent handling and no buffer leaks.
- Ensure an EmptyByteBuf has an array, an NIO buffer, and a memory
address at the same time
- Add an assertion that checks if EMPTY_BUFFER is an EmptyByteBuf,
just in case we make a mistake in the future
Motivation:
We expose no methods in ByteBuf to directly write a CharSequence into it. This leads to have the user either convert the CharSequence first to a byte array or use CharsetEncoder. Both cases have some overheads and we can do a lot better for well known Charsets like UTF-8 and ASCII.
Modifications:
Add ByteBufUtil.writeAscii(...) and ByteBufUtil.writeUtf8(...) which can do the task in an optimized way. This is especially true if the passed in ByteBuf extends AbstractByteBuf which is true for all of our implementations which not wrap another ByteBuf.
Result:
Writing an ASCII and UTF-8 CharSequence into a AbstractByteBuf is a lot faster then what the user could do by himself as we can make use of some package private methods and so eliminate reference and range checks. When the Charseq is not ASCII or UTF-8 we can still do a very good job and are on par in most of the cases with what the user would do.
The following benchmark shows the improvements:
Result: 2456866.966 ?(99.9%) 59066.370 ops/s [Average]
Statistics: (min, avg, max) = (2297025.189, 2456866.966, 2586003.225), stdev = 78851.914
Confidence interval (99.9%): [2397800.596, 2515933.336]
Benchmark Mode Samples Score Score error Units
i.n.m.b.ByteBufUtilBenchmark.writeAscii thrpt 50 9398165.238 131503.098 ops/s
i.n.m.b.ByteBufUtilBenchmark.writeAsciiString thrpt 50 9695177.968 176684.821 ops/s
i.n.m.b.ByteBufUtilBenchmark.writeAsciiStringViaArray thrpt 50 4788597.415 83181.549 ops/s
i.n.m.b.ByteBufUtilBenchmark.writeAsciiStringViaArrayWrapped thrpt 50 4722297.435 98984.491 ops/s
i.n.m.b.ByteBufUtilBenchmark.writeAsciiStringWrapped thrpt 50 4028689.762 66192.505 ops/s
i.n.m.b.ByteBufUtilBenchmark.writeAsciiViaArray thrpt 50 3234841.565 91308.009 ops/s
i.n.m.b.ByteBufUtilBenchmark.writeAsciiViaArrayWrapped thrpt 50 3311387.474 39018.933 ops/s
i.n.m.b.ByteBufUtilBenchmark.writeAsciiWrapped thrpt 50 3379764.250 66735.415 ops/s
i.n.m.b.ByteBufUtilBenchmark.writeUtf8 thrpt 50 5671116.821 101760.081 ops/s
i.n.m.b.ByteBufUtilBenchmark.writeUtf8String thrpt 50 5682733.440 111874.084 ops/s
i.n.m.b.ByteBufUtilBenchmark.writeUtf8StringViaArray thrpt 50 3564548.995 55709.512 ops/s
i.n.m.b.ByteBufUtilBenchmark.writeUtf8StringViaArrayWrapped thrpt 50 3621053.671 47632.820 ops/s
i.n.m.b.ByteBufUtilBenchmark.writeUtf8StringWrapped thrpt 50 2634029.071 52304.876 ops/s
i.n.m.b.ByteBufUtilBenchmark.writeUtf8ViaArray thrpt 50 3397049.332 57784.119 ops/s
i.n.m.b.ByteBufUtilBenchmark.writeUtf8ViaArrayWrapped thrpt 50 3318685.262 35869.562 ops/s
i.n.m.b.ByteBufUtilBenchmark.writeUtf8Wrapped thrpt 50 2473791.249 46423.114 ops/s
Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 1,387.417 sec - in io.netty.microbench.buffer.ByteBufUtilBenchmark
Results :
Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0
Results :
Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0
The *ViaArray* benchmarks are basically doing a toString().getBytes(Charset) which the others are using ByteBufUtil.write*(...).
Motivation:
CompositeByteBuf.nioBuffers(...) returns an empty ByteBuffer array if the specified length is 0. This is not consistent with other ByteBuf implementations which return an ByteBuffer array of size 1 with an empty ByteBuffer included.
Modifications:
Make CompositeByteBuf.nioBuffers(...) consistent with other ByteBuf implementations.
Result:
Consistent and correct behaviour of nioBufffers(...)
Motivation:
When calling slice(...) on a ByteBuf the returned ByteBuf should be the slice of a ByteBuf and shares it's reference count. This is important as it is perfect legal to use buf.slice(...).release() and have both, the slice and the original ByteBuf released. At the moment this is only the case if the requested slice size is > 0. This makes the behavior inconsistent and so may lead to a memory leak.
Modifications:
- Never return Unpooled.EMPTY_BUFFER when calling slice(...).
- Adding test case for buffer.slice(...).release() and buffer.duplicate(...).release()
Result:
Consistent behaviour and so no more leaks possible.
Motivation:
Before we missed to check if a buffer was released before we return the backing byte array or memoryaddress. This could lead to JVM crashes when someone tried various bulk operations on the Unsafe*ByteBuf implementations.
Modifications:
Always check if the buffer is released before all to return the byte array and memoryaddress.
Result:
No more JVM crashes because of released buffers when doing bulk operations on Unsafe*ByteBuf implementations.
Motivation:
We received a bug-report that the ByteBuf.refCnt() does sometimes not show the correct value when release() and refCnt() is called from different Threads.
Modifications:
Add test-case which shows that all is working like expected
Result:
Test-case added which shows everything is ok.
Motivation:
I introduced ensureAccessible() class as part of 6c47cc9711 in some places. Unfortunally I also added some where these are not needed and so caused a performance regression.
Modification:
Remove calls where not needed.
Result:
Fixed performance regression.