Setting table entry to nil faster than overriding the entry for frequent operations?

[R3ntrix]

I have a ring buffer that is updated through an event, as you know, the ring buffer keeps an index for where to insert the next item, when the buffer is full for the first time, the next entry will overrid the oldest entry, should I set the oldest entry to nil before overriding or just override it?

I did both and it seems that setting it to nil is more efficient.

From my primitive understanding, it seems like setting an entry to nil will notify the garbage collector to clean it up immediately, while overriding it will cause the next garbage collection cycle to look for that entry to delete it, so threre is some searching required, also when the garabge collection cycle kicks in, if there are a lot of entries, it will freeze for couple frames to get it cleaned up compared to just cleaning it up explicitely by setting the entry to nil.

Please tell me how this works?

[VonsRevenges (Von)]

When you set a variable to nil, you effectively remove the reference to the object it was pointing to. This makes the object eligible for garbage collection.

If you simply override the entry without setting it to nil, the garbage collector will eventually identify the old object as unreachable, but this might take longer or more processing.

setting the oldest entry to nil before overriding it, is better as it will maintain smoother performance, as it will reduce the number of objects the garbage collector needs to find and clean.