Private ets tables and ERL_MAX_ETS_TABLES

[OvermindDL1]

@StefanHoutzager

I understand less and less of your answers. Maybe I should just stop with elixir and do something really stupid.

Heh, sorry, basically a map of maps is perfectly fine. ^.^

[StefanHoutzager]

My nose stands correct. I mean still points forward. Serious. ^.^

[rvirding]

@sasajuric

@rvirding

There is one case where private ETS tables are definitely the way to go and that is for large amounts of data. As ETS tables are not stored on the process heap they will not affect the garbage collection time for the process

Isn’t that what I said in my post, which you responded to? If not, that’s precisely what I wanted to say

True, but my defence is that I was a bit more explicit.

[StefanHoutzager]

Nice tête-à-tête’s and likie likies back and forth, but I don’t have the idea my questions are directly answered. Never mind, the need is not pressing.

[rvirding]

One thing that I think wasn’t mentioned is that private ETS tables really aren’t handled in any special way. All tables are implemented in the same way and what makes them private, or protected or public, is basically just some flags. So private tables are not really local to the process that owns them, which is why the ERL_MAX_ETS_TABLES is per node and cannot be per process. The handling of data is also the same for all tables.

One other point which distinguishes ETS tables from maps is the way data can be grouped and accessed with more complex access functions.