*
   * <p>If {@code expectedSize} is exactly the number of entries added to the builder before {@link
   * Builder#build} is called, the builder is likely to perform better than an unsized {@link
   * #builder()} would have.
   *
   * <p>It is not specified if any performance benefits apply if {@code expectedSize} is close to,
   * but not exactly, the number of entries added to the builder.

# errors.
# There is ongoing work on Bazel team's side to provide support for transitive
# shared libraries. As part of migrating to transitive shared libraries, we
# hope to provide a better mechanism for control over symbol exporting, and
# then tackle this issue again.
#
# TODO: Remove the following two lines once TF doesn't depend on Bazel wrapping
# all library archives in -whole_archive -no_whole_archive.

				"application/x-project",
				"application/vnd.ms-tnef",
				"application/vnd.ms-wmdrm.lic-chlg-req",
				"application/vnd.ms-wmdrm.lic-resp",
				"application/vnd.ms-wmdrm.meter-chlg-req",
				"application/vnd.ms-wmdrm.meter-resp",
				"application/vnd.ms-word.document.macroenabled.12",
				"application/vnd.ms-word.template.macroenabled.12",
				"application/vnd.ms-works",
				"application/vnd.ms-wpl",

- EndpointSlice controller now handles terminating pods correctly and is better at preventing race conditions. ([#89118](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/89118), [@robscott](https://github.com/robscott)) [SIG Apps and Network]

		}
		if s[i+1] == c1 && Equal(s[i:i+n], sep) {
			return i
		}
		i++
		fails++
		if fails >= 4+i>>4 && i < t {
			// Give up on IndexByte, it isn't skipping ahead
			// far enough to be better than Rabin-Karp.
			// Experiments (using IndexPeriodic) suggest
			// the cutover is about 16 byte skips.
			// TODO: if large prefixes of sep are matching
			// we should cutover at even larger average skips,

さらに、並列性と非同期性を同時に活用できるため、テストされた多くの NodeJS フレームワークより高い性能を発揮し、C に近いコンパイル言語である Go と同等の性能になります [(すべて Starlette のおかげです)](https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r17&hw=ph&test=query&l=zijmkf-1)。

### 並行処理は並列処理より優れている？ { #is-concurrency-better-than-parallelism }

いいえ！それがこの話の教訓ではありません。

並行処理は並列処理とは異なります。そして多くの待ち時間を伴う**特定の**シナリオでは優れています。そのため、一般に Web アプリ開発では並列処理よりはるかに適しています。しかし、すべてに対して最良というわけではありません。

バランスを取るために、次の短い物語を想像してください。

  /*
   * If n <= millerRabinBases[i][0], then testing n against bases millerRabinBases[i][1..] suffices
   * to prove its primality. Values from miller-rabin.appspot.com.
   *
   * NOTE: We could get slightly better bases that would be treated as unsigned, but benchmarks
   * showed negligible performance improvements.
   */
  private static final long[][] millerRabinBaseSets = {
    {291830, 126401071349994536L},

### 동시성이 병렬성보다 더 나은가요? { #is-concurrency-better-than-parallelism }

아니요! 그게 이 이야기의 교훈은 아닙니다.

동시성은 병렬성과 다릅니다. 그리고 많은 기다림이 포함되는 **특정한** 시나리오에서는 더 낫습니다. 그 때문에 웹 애플리케이션 개발에서는 일반적으로 병렬성보다 훨씬 더 낫습니다. 하지만 모든 것에 해당하진 않습니다.

그래서 균형을 맞추기 위해, 다음의 짧은 이야기를 상상해보세요:

      ListenableFuture<? extends V>... futures) {
    /*
     * Another way to express this signature would be to bound <V> by @NonNull and accept
     * LF<? extends @Nullable V>. That might be better: There's currently no difference between the
     * outputs users get when calling this with <Foo> and calling it with <@Nullable Foo>. The only

### Node