I read that std::vector
should be contiguous. My understanding is, that its elements should be stored together, not spread out across the memory. I have simply accepted the fact and used this knowledge when for example using its data()
method to get the underlying contiguous piece of memory.
However, I came across a situation, where the vector's memory behaves in a strange way:
std::vector<int> numbers;
std::vector<int*> ptr_numbers;
for (int i = 0; i < 8; i++) {
numbers.push_back(i);
ptr_numbers.push_back(&numbers.back());
}
I expected this to give me a vector of some numbers and a vector of pointers to these numbers. However, when listing the contents of the ptr_numbers
pointers, there are different and seemingly random numbers, as though I am accessing wrong parts of memory.
I have tried to check the contents every step:
for (int i = 0; i < 8; i++) {
numbers.push_back(i);
ptr_numbers.push_back(&numbers.back());
for (auto ptr_number : ptr_numbers)
std::cout << *ptr_number << std::endl;
std::cout << std::endl;
}
The result looks roughly like this:
1
some random number
2
some random number
some random number
3
So it seems as though when I push_back()
to the numbers
vector, its older elements change their location.
So what does it exactly mean, that std::vector
is a contiguous container and why do its elements move? Does it maybe store them together, but moves them all together, when more space is needed?
Edit: Is std::vector
contiguous only since C++17? (Just to keep the comments on my previous claim relevant to future readers.)
If you try coding it this way, you will see that the values remain the same and address for each value in the vector has a difference of 4 with its adjacent element (interesting).
When you loop through both vectors. They will output the same values.
It roughly looks like this (excuse my MS Paint masterpiece):
The
std::vector
instance you have on the stack is a small object containing a pointer to a heap-allocated buffer, plus some extra variables to keep track of the size and and capacity of the vector.The heap-allocated buffer has a fixed capacity. When you reach the end of the buffer, a new buffer will be allocated somewhere else on the heap and all the previous elements will be moved into the new one. Their addresses will therefore change.
Roughly, yes. Iterator and address stability of elements is guaranteed with
std::vector
only if no reallocation takes place.The memory layout of
std::vector
hasn't changed since its first appearance in the Standard.ContiguousContainer
is just a "concept" that was added to differentiate contiguous containers from others at compile-time.The Answer
It's a single contiguous storage (a 1d array). Each time it runs out of capacity it gets reallocated and stored objects are moved to the new larger place — this is why you observe addresses of the stored objects changing.
It has always been this way, not since
C++17
.TL; DR
The storage is growing geometrically to ensure the requirement of the amortized
O(1)
push_back()
. The growth factor is 2 (Capn+1 = Capn + Capn) in most implementations of the C++ Standard Library (GCC, Clang, STLPort) and 1.5 (Capn+1 = Capn + Capn / 2) in the MSVC variant.If you pre-allocate it with
vector::reserve(N)
and sufficiently largeN
, then addresses of the stored objects won't be changing when you add new ones.In most practical applications is usually worth pre-allocating it to at least 32 elements to skip the first few reallocations shortly following one other (0→1→2→4→8→16).
It is also sometimes practical to slow it down, switch to the arithmetic growth policy (Capn+1 = Capn + Const), or stop entirely after some reasonably large size to ensure the application does not waste or grow out of memory.
Lastly, in some practical applications, like column-based object storages, it may be worth giving up the idea of contiguous storage completely in favor of a segmented one (same as what
std::deque
does but with much larger chunks). This way the data may be stored reasonably well localized for both per-column and per-row queries (though this may need some help from the memory allocator as well).That's exactly how it works and why appending elements does indeed invalidate all iterators as well as memory locations when a reallocation takes place¹. This is not only valid since C++17, it has been the case ever since.
There are a couple of benefits from this approach:
data()
method can be used to pass the underlying raw memory to APIs that work with raw pointers.push_back
,reserve
orresize
boil down to constant time, as the geometric growth amortizes over time (each timepush_back
is called the capacity is doubled in libc++ and libstdc++, and approx. growths by a factor of 1.5 in MSVC).These implications can be considered the downside of such a memory layout:
push_front
(asstd::list
orstd::deque
provide) aren't provided (insert(vec.begin(), element)
works, but is possibly expensive¹), as well as efficient merging/splicing of multiple vector instances.¹ Thanks to @FrançoisAndrieux for pointing that out.
std::vector
being a contiguous container means exactly what you think it means.However, many operations on a vector can re-locate that entire piece of memory.
One common case is when you add element to it, the vector must grow, it can re-allocate and copy all elements to another contiguous piece of memory.
In terms of the actual structure, an
std::vector
looks something like this in memory:Relevant code snippet from the
libc++
implementation as used by LLVMPrinting the raw memory contents of an
std::vector
:(Don't do this if you don't know what you're doing!)