From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Antipov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: emacs takes exhorbitantly long to read long, one-line files. Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 14:20:58 +0400 Message-ID: <519B4A8A.3000903@yandex.ru> References: <87ppwn62yr.fsf@digitalsignallabs.com> <5199E19A.3020503@yandex.ru> <877git6hhv.fsf@digitalsignallabs.com> <519A08B2.7010106@yandex.ru> <87r4h1lo20.fsf@kwarm.red-bean.com> <838v39wsjz.fsf@gnu.org> <20891.10479.288862.913812@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1369131684 17117 80.91.229.3 (21 May 2013 10:21:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 10:21:24 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Karl Fogel , Eli Zaretskii , Randy Yates , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Ulrich Mueller Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue May 21 12:21:23 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Uejh4-0007SD-Qj for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 21 May 2013 12:21:22 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45774 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Uejh4-0007qc-DH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 21 May 2013 06:21:22 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:34610) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Uejgw-0007q0-RZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 21 May 2013 06:21:20 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Uejgq-0000io-OS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 21 May 2013 06:21:14 -0400 Original-Received: from forward15.mail.yandex.net ([95.108.130.119]:55648) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Uejgl-0000gN-4J; Tue, 21 May 2013 06:21:03 -0400 Original-Received: from smtp12.mail.yandex.net (smtp12.mail.yandex.net [95.108.131.191]) by forward15.mail.yandex.net (Yandex) with ESMTP id 386339E1D9F; Tue, 21 May 2013 14:20:59 +0400 (MSK) Original-Received: from smtp12.mail.yandex.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp12.mail.yandex.net (Yandex) with ESMTP id B61BC16A0159; Tue, 21 May 2013 14:20:58 +0400 (MSK) Original-Received: from unknown (unknown [37.139.80.10]) by smtp12.mail.yandex.net (nwsmtp/Yandex) with ESMTP id UB4SUUOu2R-KwxqY4cJ; Tue, 21 May 2013 14:20:58 +0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yandex.ru; s=mail; t=1369131658; bh=5fDCAD6Ee4SAp/o1GzDfNxLKGMzQrLUQOj8iKKJT2AY=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject: References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=k7vpp+6TGt09cBIpT/fvugG0oS+lfo6ve74epFqOtEK1EIDtEIUPgbbLuRIVrnVkw QozNFvOboazEhRTsPB0T4Fzb0E0zFWQdnHQiinZbRn8DBlfbRKSKCYqNBX6GgonlP2 H0qFIc63l1oOCRXOXaRSljgijC5Ptyk2QOX0/s6Q= Authentication-Results: smtp12.mail.yandex.net; dkim=pass header.i=@yandex.ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 In-Reply-To: <20891.10479.288862.913812@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 95.108.130.119 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:159706 Archived-At: On 05/21/2013 11:57 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > I've done this test for a file with one line of 16 MB, and I get the > following times for the first and second commands (emacs -Q -nw in > an 80x24 xterm): > > Emacs 23.4: 4 s / 9 s > Emacs 24.3: 16 s / 34 s > > Is this degradation of performance expected? Can you try 24.3 with (setq-default bidi-display-reordering nil)? With BIDI disabled, it shouldn't be 4x at least. Dmitry