From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#73484: 31.0.50; Abolishing etags-regen-file-extensions Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2024 05:33:24 +0300 Message-ID: <86wmiktzez.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87tteaznog.fsf@zephyr.silentflame.com> <8734lrrj4e.fsf@zephyr.silentflame.com> <87o74c1ce1.fsf@zephyr.silentflame.com> <87jzezzg87.fsf_-_@zephyr.silentflame.com> <37e4b3cd-6363-4f55-9921-92a1182679dc@gutov.dev> <86ttdy50ja.fsf@gnu.org> <75fe4289-da41-454d-ba92-22a92ea7002f@gutov.dev> <86frpe2186.fsf@gnu.org> <8e305b6d-8ca8-4437-990f-183ebc007d18@gutov.dev> <865xqa1ggi.fsf@gnu.org> <86ttdtzoof.fsf@gnu.org> <8d7dc133-9828-4023-821f-e4403f899f81@gutov.dev> <86ttdsxt6x.fsf@gnu.org> <52cb1caa-9e7e-45df-b328-d60948d397f6@gutov.dev> <864j5rxca1.fsf@gnu.org> <87a5fiijy9.fsf@tucano.isti.cnr.it> <86jzelvjh4.fsf@gnu.org> <8b6560a9-e2d6-42ae-ac1d-014700f21804@gutov.dev> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="29106"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: pot@gnu.org, 73484@debbugs.gnu.org, spwhitton@spwhitton.name To: Dmitry Gutov Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Oct 07 04:34:19 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1sxdZi-0007Rn-8u for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 07 Oct 2024 04:34:18 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sxdZN-0000G0-1A; Sun, 06 Oct 2024 22:33:57 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sxdZL-0000Fi-Hl for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Oct 2024 22:33:55 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sxdZL-0000OV-8m for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Oct 2024 22:33:55 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=debbugs.gnu.org; s=debbugs-gnu-org; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:To:Subject; bh=cKXIWY8p/b7WLYmNjJdaf89eslx+xSWZ2ep6avNdz20=; b=q691+DeZNk64fGs2H59nRv2tGbSVxv8WSiIvbRyNYKq7NBkTjkaVGza3ivz+9BTmh9S9ee2/7+MLq8E0Q+K2QCx3YP/peuLxdcYDQaw4wP2da6omjGteNlaDH3s/TG7JZUBclRy40HXe6vOtqbgwpDjWWiKtzRfsXl5j9Nh4euvM/GvMt3GorlYv7No2fyUujd4BZAq+VSgaY0zh/6sgX8SnRkJCed/9Jj4Y2uu/M5zpjFuQEPHjXAXr6ZxJhTuZ+0NS8/XJjjAQNigNdYANZ/9eXUOtII0i5grA6ij4baY0LZu8oMarGs8XSwd7EGi4OXXoesF9eHbIFxNiOFHGNA==; Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1sxdZR-0002IU-Pp for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Oct 2024 22:34:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2024 02:34:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 73484 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 73484-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B73484.17282684238799 (code B ref 73484); Mon, 07 Oct 2024 02:34:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 73484) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Oct 2024 02:33:43 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43727 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1sxdZ9-0002Hq-6Q for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 06 Oct 2024 22:33:43 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:58258) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1sxdZ7-0002HZ-2w for 73484@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 06 Oct 2024 22:33:42 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sxdYu-0000NP-3g; Sun, 06 Oct 2024 22:33:28 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=cKXIWY8p/b7WLYmNjJdaf89eslx+xSWZ2ep6avNdz20=; b=l0m/uV26HAlE zZmvKnqML7BrAWparQe/axUq1cDNHofRWaDBlOMEM6opzXrI5y5fzEAsAMmdQP4Lw9dUzE+2KeQ7j QesyDMfTOHv9nRxUtm766KZWs8a6h6IwxVPmGAy6sabNtM4ZEaNnEywgVtNpQHFokEL53ZNayTe4Z Kt1bhGOFstej67vSrPiFGmwetfM49kaVuHgsWaRhJByPv7q5fHJXKUEMfCaH/ExJSRHeuGGPSbm2F 8M0VJzRItzIyazbfHjMbnpwq/41mtpNuQXEKpLEDfoj4Pu5SnE42xx2Ik2Z3aBlAJcWyL2c2PvQCl af3S+KmXFUHbQmimUVm84g==; In-Reply-To: <8b6560a9-e2d6-42ae-ac1d-014700f21804@gutov.dev> (message from Dmitry Gutov on Sun, 6 Oct 2024 22:14:46 +0300) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:293101 Archived-At: > Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2024 22:14:46 +0300 > Cc: pot@gnu.org, spwhitton@spwhitton.name, 73484@debbugs.gnu.org > From: Dmitry Gutov > > On 06/10/2024 09:22, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > >> Then, the total time increased a lot: from 30 s to 30-40 min. > > > > I don't understand why. How many files with no extensions are in that > > tree, and what was the etags command line in both cases? > > Sorry, I have to add a correction: it's about 15 min either way. Seems > like the first time I either messed up the start time, or the directory > was in "cold" cache, or the used etags some much older version. > > So to reiterate: the current etags-regen scans in around 30s, and the > simple switch scans the directory in 15 minutes. Retesting the change > from previous email, it doesn't really help. Can you please show the etags command line in each of these two cases that you are comparing? > > And if they don't have extensions, the code you > > removed would have caused etags to scan these files anyway, looking > > for Fortran or C tags. So how come the change slowed down etags so > > much? What am I missing? > > I think it would also concern "unknown" extensions, right? Like .txt, > .png and so on. I have difficulty reasoning about this without knowing the command lines you used. E.g., I don't understand why in one case it would scan files with unknown extensions that were not scanned in the other.