From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David De La Harpe Golden Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs 23.0 is much slower starting than Emacs 22.3 Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 17:57:29 +0100 Message-ID: <4900ACF9.7060501@harpegolden.net> References: <20081022091136.GB924@muc.de> <20081022151444.GE924@muc.de> <48FF58FB.6000302@harpegolden.net> <20081022211202.GA1037@muc.de> <49001F5A.7040402@harpegolden.net> <20081023090908.GB2666@muc.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.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 1224781103 22295 80.91.229.12 (23 Oct 2008 16:58:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 16:58:23 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Alan Mackenzie Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Oct 23 18:59:24 2008 connect(): Connection refused 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 1Kt3We-0003AB-Tg for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 18:59:09 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38922 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Kt3VY-0006vj-Ko for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 12:58:00 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Kt3VT-0006uv-JC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 12:57:55 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Kt3VS-0006u9-JR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 12:57:55 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=49871 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Kt3VS-0006u0-Gb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 12:57:54 -0400 Original-Received: from harpegolden.net ([65.99.215.13]:33723) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Kt3VS-0004Ba-KB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 12:57:54 -0400 Original-Received: from [87.198.54.44] (87-198-54-44.ptr.magnet.ie [87.198.54.44]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "David De La Harpe Golden", Issuer "David De La Harpe Golden Personal CA rev 3" (verified OK)) by harpegolden.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D5918120; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 17:57:46 +0100 (IST) User-Agent: Mozilla-Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20081018) In-Reply-To: <20081023090908.GB2666@muc.de> 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:104905 Archived-At: Alan Mackenzie wrote: > Hi, David! > > On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 07:53:14AM +0100, David De La Harpe Golden wrote: >> Alan Mackenzie wrote: > >>> OK, 100 random files.el. How big were they? >>> > >> Probably fairly small. I went back and did the 180 .c files from the >> emacs source tree, totalling 9.2MB, and that took 6-7 secs (Which was a >> bit slower than I expected!) > > OK. Was that Emacs 22 or 23? Presumably 23. Any chance you could time > it using the other Emacs? > Yes, now using "time emacs -f kill-emacs" (warm cache this time, not rebooting between runs...) emacs run real user sys 22 1 4.880 3.960 0.180 22 2 4.589 3.992 0.136 22 3 4.764 4.076 0.176 23 4 7.275 6.636 0.120 23 5 6.958 6.276 0.188 23 6 6.898 6.268 0.132 So yeah, 23 is slower. I tried just putting 180 find-file-noselects in a file and loading it i.e. $ find /usr/local/src/emacs -name '*.c' -printf \ '(find-file-noselect "%p")\n' >fftest.el $ emacs --batch --eval '(byte-compile-file "fftest.el")' $ time emacs -l fftest.elc -f kill-emacs emacs run real user sys 22 1 4.523 3.888 0.136 22 2 4.744 4.172 0.112 22 3 4.457 3.836 0.176 23 4 7.177 6.532 0.152 23 5 7.198 6.544 0.160 23 6 7.159 6.472 0.220 So FWIW probably the problem is in the find-file call path rather than anything desktop.el is doing in particular (though there IS a kinda dubious mapc in desktop-create-buffer, but it likely doesn't really bite until rather larger file counts again (triangular progression in file count)).