From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: martin rudalics <rudalics@gmx.at>
Cc: 16830@debbugs.gnu.org, stefan.hahn@s-hahn.de
Subject: bug#16830: [Bug] 24.3.50; massive slow down in forward-line
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 19:03:19 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <83lhwgoeg8.fsf@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <531EC497.5040907@gmx.at>
> Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 09:08:55 +0100
> From: martin rudalics <rudalics@gmx.at>
> CC: "Stefan-W. Hahn" <stefan.hahn@s-hahn.de>,
> Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>,
> 16830@debbugs.gnu.org
>
> > Until we can dynamically estimate the line length and turn the cache
> > on only for long lines, I suggest to leave the default ON, and install
> > the patches below. My reasoning is that in most situations the
> > slow-down is negligible, while for very long lines the speedup can be
> > significant.
>
> In general I inspect long lines only in bug reports. Is that sufficient
> reason to not follow the advice
>
> There is no reason to set this to nil except for debugging purposes.
>
> after your patch is applied?
Actually, I suggest to only change the default if you ever see a
tangible difference with and without the cache.
If you review the timings I posted, you will realize that a single
call to find_newline takes a fraction of a microsecond on a reasonably
modern machine, so unless you use code that calls forward-line with a
very large argument, like hundreds of thousands, you will never see
the difference.
Also, turning off cache-long-scans disables not only the newline
cache, but also 2 other caches, at least one of which (the bidi
paragraph start cache) might be important for redisplay speed, and
doesn't suffer from the slowdown I discovered with the newline cache,
because the way we use that cache is very different.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-03-11 17:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-21 12:16 bug#16830: [Bug] 24.3.50; massive slow down in forward-line Stefan-W. Hahn
2014-02-21 12:32 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-21 15:51 ` Stefan-W. Hahn
2014-02-21 17:50 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-02-22 8:38 ` Stefan-W. Hahn
[not found] ` <20140222083926.GC27381@pille.home>
2014-02-22 9:18 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-22 11:08 ` Stefan-W. Hahn
2014-02-22 11:29 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-22 11:36 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-22 12:33 ` Stefan-W. Hahn
2014-02-22 12:55 ` Juanma Barranquero
2014-02-22 15:06 ` Stefan-W. Hahn
2014-02-22 13:05 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-21 7:43 ` Stefan-W. Hahn
2014-02-23 18:04 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-22 12:27 ` Stefan-W. Hahn
2014-03-10 18:58 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-03-11 8:08 ` martin rudalics
2014-03-11 17:03 ` Eli Zaretskii [this message]
2014-03-12 14:12 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-03-16 16:32 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-03-17 15:05 ` bug#16830: " Dmitry Antipov
2014-03-17 16:39 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-06-22 16:50 ` Eli Zaretskii
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=83lhwgoeg8.fsf@gnu.org \
--to=eliz@gnu.org \
--cc=16830@debbugs.gnu.org \
--cc=rudalics@gmx.at \
--cc=stefan.hahn@s-hahn.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).