From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Kenichi Handa Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: profiling emacs-23.1 vs emacs-22.3 Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 17:06:06 +0900 Message-ID: References: <200908032029.n73KTi9h017528@godzilla.ics.uci.edu> <200908240807.n7O87ubg024643@godzilla.ics.uci.edu> <200908241826.n7OIQRhS001092@godzilla.ics.uci.edu> <200908251847.n7PIlb4C012720@godzilla.ics.uci.edu> <200908260633.n7Q6XRXi018187@godzilla.ics.uci.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1251274635 7637 80.91.229.12 (26 Aug 2009 08:17:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 08:17:15 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Dan Nicolaescu Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Aug 26 10:17:08 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MgDgo-0005Rh-K5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 26 Aug 2009 10:17:06 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48438 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MgDgn-0000Ui-Ni for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 26 Aug 2009 04:17:05 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MgDWP-0006Xi-2P for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 26 Aug 2009 04:06:21 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MgDWK-0006Ru-Ty for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 26 Aug 2009 04:06:20 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=39337 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MgDWK-0006Rh-LW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 26 Aug 2009 04:06:16 -0400 Original-Received: from mx20.gnu.org ([199.232.41.8]:7811) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MgDWK-0002KM-4n for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 26 Aug 2009 04:06:16 -0400 Original-Received: from mx1.aist.go.jp ([150.29.246.133]) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MgDWG-0003vb-Qs for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 26 Aug 2009 04:06:13 -0400 Original-Received: from rqsmtp1.aist.go.jp (rqsmtp1.aist.go.jp [150.29.254.115]) by mx1.aist.go.jp with ESMTP id n7Q8670r024529; Wed, 26 Aug 2009 17:06:07 +0900 (JST) env-from (handa@m17n.org) Original-Received: from smtp3.aist.go.jp by rqsmtp1.aist.go.jp with ESMTP id n7Q866Oa014444; Wed, 26 Aug 2009 17:06:06 +0900 (JST) env-from (handa@m17n.org) Original-Received: by smtp3.aist.go.jp with ESMTP id n7Q866iH000420; Wed, 26 Aug 2009 17:06:06 +0900 (JST) env-from (handa@m17n.org) Original-Received: from handa by etlken with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MgDWA-0006sr-Mr; Wed, 26 Aug 2009 17:06:06 +0900 In-reply-to: <200908260633.n7Q6XRXi018187@godzilla.ics.uci.edu> (message from Dan Nicolaescu on Tue, 25 Aug 2009 23:33:27 -0700 (PDT)) X-Detected-Operating-System: by mx20.gnu.org: Solaris 9 X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:114611 Archived-At: In article <200908260633.n7Q6XRXi018187@godzilla.ics.uci.edu>, Dan Nicolaescu writes: > Some CJK charsets are necessary to create the default > fontset. I think it's possible to avoid loading unnecessary > charsets for creating the default fontset. I'll work on it. > Can the data in the default fontset be in the dumped image in pure > memory? To not have to create it every time on start up and GC it > should be a win. Is it possible to put the whole char-table in pure space, then modify some part at running time? > So, (3) is still 13% slower than (1), but I think it's a > necessary cost for having the full Unicode support. And > usually the slowness of GC doesn't direclty affect the total > execution time. > It does, see the profiling data that I sent. The problem with GC is > that it will flush all the caches if there's too much memory to walk > over. And the slowdown in GC speed is directly related to the big > increase in the number of GCable objects. If most of the execution is spent by GC, shouldn't such a task run with bigger gc-cons-threshold? But, I tried your test case of indent-region with different gc-cons-threshold (gct), and the result shows that GC is not the main culprit of the slowness. emacs-22 (gct=400000): 16 to 17 sec emacs-22 (gct=10000000):16 to 17 sec trunk (gct=400000): 20 to 21 sec trunk (gct=10000000): 19 to 20 sec --- Kenichi Handa handa@m17n.org