Re: [Global-commit] global global/global.c libutil/gtagsop.c libuti...

[Hideki IWAMOTO]

On Sun, 03 Dec 2006 20:37:57 +0900, Shigio YAMAGUCHI wrote...
> The difference between two seems to be rather in sort method.
> The CVS version uses internal sort, and your patch uses GPATH.
> 
> How about combining the two like this?
> 
>       if (number of lines of the result > RESULT_THRESHOLD)
>               /* use GPATH */
>       else
>               /* use internal sort */

When a project is large, most of the execution time is spent for the pooling. 
The switching after pooling seems too late.
This was measured using "2006-12-02 0:00 JST" version. 

$ ls
linux-2.0.40  linux-2.2.26  linux-2.4.33  linux-2.6.19
$ foreach dir ( * )
foreach? echo === $dir ===
foreach? foreach opt ( '' '-r' '-s' )
foreach? (cd $dir; unsetenv GTAGSCACHE; time global $opt '.*' >/dev/null)
foreach? end
foreach? end
=== linux-2.0.40 ===
pool: 0.035313s sort: 0.001727s
0.036u 0.004s 0:00.04 75.0%     0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w
pool: 0.049168s sort: 0.001615s
0.040u 0.012s 0:00.05 100.0%    0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w
pool: 0.056144s sort: 0.001506s
0.048u 0.012s 0:00.06 83.3%     0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w
=== linux-2.2.26 ===
pool: 0.125180s sort: 0.004610s
0.124u 0.012s 0:00.12 108.3%    0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w
pool: 0.241891s sort: 0.004626s
0.228u 0.024s 0:00.24 100.0%    0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w
pool: 0.278062s sort: 0.004371s
0.216u 0.032s 0:00.28 85.7%     0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w
=== linux-2.4.33 ===
pool: 0.464946s sort: 0.011626s
0.396u 0.088s 0:00.48 97.9%     0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w
pool: 1.258450s sort: 0.011654s
1.204u 0.076s 0:01.27 100.0%    0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w
pool: 0.954396s sort: 0.010519s
0.908u 0.064s 0:00.97 98.9%     0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w
=== linux-2.6.19 ===
pool: 1.115000s sort: 0.021195s
1.060u 0.088s 0:01.14 100.0%    0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w
pool: 3.748531s sort: 0.021054s
3.676u 0.104s 0:03.78 99.7%     0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w
pool: 2.945058s sort: 0.019107s
2.908u 0.068s 0:02.97 99.6%     0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w

----
Hideki IWAMOTO  address@hidden

test.patch
Description: Binary data