From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: yyoncho Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#31138: Native json slower than json.el Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2019 21:16:53 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87sh806xwa.fsf@chapu.is> <834lkf7ely.fsf@gnu.org> <878t9own1p.fsf@chapu.is> <838t9o4hvl.fsf@gnu.org> <83r2ayovkx.fsf@gnu.org> <83pnqiormy.fsf@gnu.org> <83lg15pvzr.fsf@gnu.org> <83k1gppu73.fsf@gnu.org> <83ftrdprmj.fsf@gnu.org> <83d0mhpn99.fsf@gnu.org> <83zhplo25s.fsf@gnu.org> <83va09nwg3.fsf@gnu.org> <83tvftne0j.fsf@gnu.org> <40DA9396-044E-4D00-946E-42B776B51BFA@gnu.org> <83r2awnw0w.fsf@gnu.org> <83d0mgnn31.fsf@gnu.org> <835zs7och6.fsf@gnu.org> <83tvfqnbxc.fsf@gnu.org> <83lg12n75s.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000bedfe50584f00cb3" Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="108341"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?S=C3=A9bastien?= Chapuis , 31138@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 25 20:18:13 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1h8V6p-000Rze-Ep for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 25 Mar 2019 20:18:11 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47251 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h8V6o-0006Tv-FW for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 25 Mar 2019 15:18:10 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:46660) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h8V6i-0006Tb-1Q for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 25 Mar 2019 15:18:05 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h8V6g-0004ge-Vw for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 25 Mar 2019 15:18:04 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:45141) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h8V6g-0004gY-Qn for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 25 Mar 2019 15:18:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1h8V6g-0007yY-9u for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 25 Mar 2019 15:18:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: yyoncho Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2019 19:18:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 31138 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: moreinfo Original-Received: via spool by 31138-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B31138.155354143230593 (code B ref 31138); Mon, 25 Mar 2019 19:18:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 31138) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Mar 2019 19:17:12 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58685 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1h8V5r-0007xN-OH for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 25 Mar 2019 15:17:12 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-qt1-f175.google.com ([209.85.160.175]:37430) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1h8V5q-0007x8-2k for 31138@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 25 Mar 2019 15:17:10 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-qt1-f175.google.com with SMTP id z16so11721015qtn.4 for <31138@debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 25 Mar 2019 12:17:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=xqOMEgq+VtNDBOM+1RqlNv/wkMZ2RtoCRIhQuShHZ70=; b=E6IlFvuf0RK7B4A6LjzFJNY0ZZnWvxsy175TZlzr7jSLZv/I+ruGs8G357VOkZzMYT XCcqybL/zkh1/V4hZHY1foNUz2sSQi+cMkUromS2tbRFZvvzjpAeNyeTeVok1gvs4q0d 1f7KyDSzKPrzTDZTUsaYn2VubT3B58w/dGjWszvmJQgVRb/nMtbqy+ZAyU9Smsh/xUbT yGMpWTHlLhWxb14DL+Py9Rjd8Pt59t9Uq7akp2NNulMJ6CJlYlhAoAbvzRICxiuH2DZT LyjXJnALf6JgFZ0h3W/L7MEmxv3o7k6AEYNrCBO7o+CD0kGjpM7clNPZb97M8+eXaZpN 7ZZg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=xqOMEgq+VtNDBOM+1RqlNv/wkMZ2RtoCRIhQuShHZ70=; b=tE/yjmtHz4IygvQBcN3+rpYASIQ29nD2tC/F9Zzj8GHkwiQ/HfiMYP7HbvSSsvDyKc TWFEZJMfR2Uq7esGAUzmLCGvGhNN5GKBG7cp971X76484T7hYSjfEE5Us2bhJMef5jG6 dgRXeKOt0ZRRoaxFeeJExiVeQpsFZQlNEU49XIjhwphGcVXi8Gx6J9XT+VId76//6x8S zc6pUnJSJCi3vnVo3q0VN7LlSLm+V9GxnP3qjpzekfyhtojAIfr5f9nVhBiLt0LVq2rK Ax2NarGuibohdEoWP15Zu1wHAkZN+bg7H/zNJCTMSn7JWBZuZ91PywBZ78iXaEoE4pe4 1JQg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVfzLhRg7LY4dg6mL9fPckzcii7zqirbevy74nTqQdLTtgE1OYP uvw8ppkECF8kDZ3zJNMo3mGAqfk/O+VXg1c0oF0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwZh0dXdMRmnzhpk9xQS8LSpzM+ezv9l6IF5G/k3+JmWymSIXnqTrS0Jht0Si5oSQFSESqN5z5nMclhTcunXe4= X-Received: by 2002:a0c:d6c1:: with SMTP id l1mr21691189qvi.173.1553541424405; Mon, 25 Mar 2019 12:17:04 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <83lg12n75s.fsf@gnu.org> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.51.188.43 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:156786 Archived-At: --000000000000bedfe50584f00cb3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Eli, I am unable to see any difference in the performance of the json parsing in emacs -q and in my setup - it is still ~2 times slower. I believe that it is caused by code_convert_string . I compiled emacs without that call and there is no difference in performance in both setups and the parsing is 2 times faster than emacs -q with code_convert_string. I want to discuss the native json performance in the context of lsp-mode needs. Is it ok to do it in this thread? Thanks, Ivan On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 8:25 PM Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > From: yyoncho > > Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2019 20:20:57 +0200 > > Cc: S=C3=A9bastien Chapuis , > > 31138@debbugs.gnu.org > > > > The patch seems to be addressing the hooks related issue. > > Yes. Do you see improvement in performance? > --000000000000bedfe50584f00cb3 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Eli,

I am unable to= see any difference in the performance of the json=C2=A0parsing in emacs -q= and in my setup=C2=A0- it is still ~2 times slower. I believe that it is c= aused by=C2=A0code_convert_string .=C2=A0I compiled emacs without that call= and there is no difference in performance in both setups and the parsing i= s 2 times faster than emacs -q with code_convert_string.

I want to discuss the native json performance in the context of lsp-= mode needs. Is it ok to do it in this thread?

Than= ks,
Ivan

On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 8:25 PM Eli Zaretskii= <eliz@gnu.org>= wrote:
> Fro= m: yyoncho <yyonc= ho@gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2019 20:20:57 +0200
> Cc: S=C3=A9bastien Chapuis <sebastien@chapu.is>,
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A031138@debbugs.gnu.org
>
> The patch seems to be addressing the hooks related issue.

Yes.=C2=A0 Do you see improvement in performance?
--000000000000bedfe50584f00cb3--