From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#42966: Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 23:44:57 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87d01imtwl.fsf@gnus.org> <3708c3db-df78-1a50-857a-595f2412e284@yandex.ru> <87v9fa44im.fsf@gnus.org> <1e9908c7-337d-9790-cd37-5232bc04233c@yandex.ru> <875z79z5mw.fsf@gnus.org> <52df0404-979f-872b-a60e-5259c0893f15@yandex.ru> <87wnzonful.fsf@gmx.de> <87y2jvwxkd.fsf@gmx.de> <057dedcd-8f2f-615e-f660-389b9013336a@yandex.ru> <87o8kqurf4.fsf@gmx.de> <40bfcc66-dd6e-1acd-4236-c3a6723ce6c7@yandex.ru> <87eelluicz.fsf@gmx.de> <874kmgwxt9.fsf@gnus.org> <10a8d7cd-2b67-10aa-da1f-7c380b1f1828@yandex.ru> <875z6wvgyz.fsf@gnus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="31312"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 Cc: Michael Albinus , Sam Steingold , 42966@debbugs.gnu.org To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Oct 26 23:03:56 2020 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 1kXAaq-00080Q-5u for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 23:03:56 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34982 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kXAap-0005We-2k for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 18:03:55 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:34278) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kXAJW-0006u4-B9 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 17:46:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:58438) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kXAJV-0002pF-TS for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 17:46:01 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kXAJV-000412-RI for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 17:46:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Dmitry Gutov Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 21:46:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 42966 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: fixed Original-Received: via spool by 42966-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B42966.160374870712167 (code B ref 42966); Mon, 26 Oct 2020 21:46:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 42966) by debbugs.gnu.org; 26 Oct 2020 21:45:07 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41744 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kXAId-00039t-H5 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 17:45:07 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-wm1-f44.google.com ([209.85.128.44]:36827) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kXAIb-00032x-Q5 for 42966@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 17:45:06 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-wm1-f44.google.com with SMTP id e2so13996400wme.1 for <42966@debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 14:45:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=CTBmOsnPbdbMYJx2U03ca4zHPCjqp30a3dFTRpAzpdg=; b=lx+QH1hCMv46nHxIIpNEAl2YXzVyjAfq/xbIemgI21rhDnBs0JM1WmTtNrxiJRqiHw p3fge41t7JT8H9up82jF+ltlbhDwc9BFE67AlH1HSoZwpwyhCtU3x43FBdgWUHu/tgzt 9U4ukFwREayVPGdMq7buPhrXH2CPCDgG2uBhEGtEgFvuL9kwCNAfNFWkjag73Ql35ZMd zoZX8z6gBMkYlUgveilYcs/bJjB7zG3rxOrGQqqpL8jDsAxD5AvnJ1ewU8wHg7fI6IkF KkQIteIG5L2JuM7zRfKrMHupBm45nNLk9vE+JNIyAv4+j6/f6egzdb2+QpYjyakFZke2 WzEw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id :date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=CTBmOsnPbdbMYJx2U03ca4zHPCjqp30a3dFTRpAzpdg=; b=KCsBCszrKWqzI7kPGFl946W9dba8frQjy3jPKKYw5Uy4VKCMjpLVH5/0k21sFUESNP eJkcYN561w6oDmnKwZQsDZmHpHKNtiVhjjCC5Hz0aQUx1DeecqswVIEG+2kcmjWSFfmc d/jBUY88BRB1FAL7vmebPeMSVZv0XC7tEjTp2/t+nlg1vXH4g4J8z7Avo0GII+GrODP3 qCTHMfUX2nqgyTjEIkNkdG0obM2g7IkbYwW6IJChgs4y8J2CVoqj0I3qnElWumQDFlh0 ql1S0tnE0wpkTn978te0QwyMc/fZRBJ8GF5GXkO8+ZMPvOk5JtlZfpMlJXTlH4cCFpoy HJlw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533VBYYVXj8PudtNTVe3pTlrBMyLiUhTfTAehzUnam95D8j8e+88 VzuarIm9zTO1JuJVxlyZcoEaIYxIQJZWDQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzZi5G3b6Lyh9ZeecGRZeLmLR/58WmZ0TnTenexmVMrgutXJTgFHsd755jWb2T+0fWn2niXug== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:c906:: with SMTP id f6mr18995343wmb.9.1603748699655; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 14:44:59 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [192.168.0.4] ([66.205.71.3]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id t7sm23589163wrx.42.2020.10.26.14.44.58 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 26 Oct 2020 14:44:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <875z6wvgyz.fsf@gnus.org> Content-Language: en-US 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:191677 Archived-At: On 26.10.2020 23:02, Lars Ingebrigtsen wrote: > Dmitry Gutov writes: > >> On 26.10.2020 22:13, Lars Ingebrigtsen wrote: >>> Oops; you were talking about the other cache patch here, not my proposed >>> patch. Oh, well. >> >> Yes, it was a side investigation to clear up the irregularity in your >> testing. > > I guess we'll find out if my patch leads to performance regressions now, > then. :-) Yeah, all right. In my testing locally it's fast enough (1000 iterations is plenty). I'd test with an actual remote host, though: when the ping is >100ms (a regular occurrence in my life: ping 8.8.8.8 is 73ms, though I don't often use Tramp), the cost of one process call would look different. But anyway, if Michael doesn't object to this change, I definitely won't argue.