完善性能测试

Author: FishGoddess

README.en.md

@@ -110,11 +110,12 @@ $ go test -v ./_examples/performance_test.go
 
 > Environment：R7-5800X CPU @ 3.8GHZ GHZ, 32 GB RAM
 
-| tests       | write time (less is better) | read time (less is better) | mixed-operation time (less is better) |
-|-------------|-----------------------------|----------------------------|---------------------------------------|
-| **cachego** | **965ms**                   | **949ms**                  | **991ms**                             |
-| go-cache    | 3216ms                      | 980ms                      | 4508ms                                |
-| freeCache   | 954ms                       | 968ms                      | 987ms                                 |
+| tests       | read time (less is better) | write time (less is better) | mixed-operation time (less is better) |
+|-------------|----------------------------|-----------------------------|---------------------------------------|
+| **cachego** | **945ms**                  | **942ms**                   | **941ms**                             |
+| go-cache    | 965ms                      | 3251ms                      | 4390ms                                |
+| freeCache   | 935ms                      | 994ms                       | 1012ms                                |
+| ECache      | 931ms                      | 1068ms                      | 1071ms                                |
 
 As you can see, cachego has a high performance in concurrent, but segmented lock mechanism has one-more-time positioning
 operation, so if the price of locking is less than the cost of positioning, this mechanism is dragging. The reading

README.md

@@ -109,11 +109,12 @@ $ go test -v ./_examples/performance_test.go
 
 > 测试环境：R7-5800X CPU @ 3.8GHZ GHZ，32 GB RAM
 
-| 测试          | 写入消耗时间 (越小越好) | 读取消耗时间 (越小越好) | 混合操作消耗时间 (越小越好) |
+| 测试          | 读取消耗时间 (越小越好) | 写入消耗时间 (越小越好) | 混合操作消耗时间 (越小越好) |
 |-------------|---------------|---------------|-----------------|
-| **cachego** | **965ms**     | **949ms**     | **991ms**       |
-| go-cache    | 3216ms        | 980ms         | 4508ms          |
-| freeCache   | 954ms         | 968ms         | 987ms           |
+| **cachego** | **945ms**     | **942ms**     | **941ms**       |
+| go-cache    | 965ms         | 3251ms        | 4390ms          |
+| freeCache   | 935ms         | 994ms         | 1012ms          |
+| ECache      | 931ms         | 1068ms        | 1071ms          |
 
 可以看出，由于使用了分段锁机制，读写性能在并发下依然非常高，但是分段锁会多一次定位的操作，如果加锁的消耗小于定位的消耗，那分段锁就不占优势。 这也是为什么 cachego 在写入性能上比 go-cache
 强一大截，但是读取性能却没强多少的原因。后续会着重优化读取性能！