From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Alex Harsanyi Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: w32-pipe-read-delay (was: vc-dir operation is very slow on large git repositories in Emacs 26.1) Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2018 21:32:24 +0800 Message-ID: References: <83k1qtsbgi.fsf@gnu.org> <83zhzoqkgv.fsf@gnu.org> <83efgzqjv5.fsf@gnu.org> <83wouqptm6.fsf@gnu.org> <83k1qqufwq.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1529760663 25648 195.159.176.226 (23 Jun 2018 13:31:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2018 13:31:03 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 23 15:30:59 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fWid0-0006Z3-QS for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 23 Jun 2018 15:30:58 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38532 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fWif8-0006CA-2F for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 23 Jun 2018 09:33:10 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36773) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fWieR-0006C4-52 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Jun 2018 09:32:27 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fWieQ-0001sZ-C7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Jun 2018 09:32:27 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-it0-x234.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::234]:53213) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fWieQ-0001sT-76 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Jun 2018 09:32:26 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-it0-x234.google.com with SMTP id m194-v6so6531348itg.2 for ; Sat, 23 Jun 2018 06:32:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=kIHo/3Tjr79vS5UwkD+CCHvpaSWZpW53X39f0/G25DY=; b=b9aVXdMuAZYwlgAYnqBqvK3cYWuWTIWJTAC5RD8GDtz3yRsvO5lZ/ZLiI6PJ20Hnsv WEyHxXz1PtHuxxjRf/F79leDPQopJagbTBFWqWAfEZUkBEN5+rl+eyLQpVr6NB2ZI1OQ aLWTr2zwtqJFzQR7IeLKzGJ9pn2QucrN5ypcPk68rfGvP15w6svvHfpZuo9nzQdtFzba ZojVx+ag4zYQBcjZldfjQUJwyBfGFsNOJOgjydySYs0VqFxKPZ/0HrOJVvWAkU6P2XYB toQTMcYRNIGE3WR9S2pAegZ6idtKGTJhpkkJhwT7NzsHFbMTBE7esae0DompxIe/BgBV 2L3A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=kIHo/3Tjr79vS5UwkD+CCHvpaSWZpW53X39f0/G25DY=; b=C8o4zoDtwPynm0zKwkXsBPl62HpA/0YhpjziQOoTtjHET+fROh2PX9r7QPCgZ+YCv8 Krr/ENk6uM+hL2mYO6pq+0rpkiNAo4C5G7JXe+nMWWhRa87jWWhfEITIK0Uij8fw6V+y cgI3LmhgCu8G+8vMrLkAD3+5ekWEU0RE+QiinTvzlM9cAtYAXSjNY73ZMkp1B+gY8Dtr pGgT3k0tRTi5kSMCrZqr5i9Sl1T33dl8/5K7vkV8CwUy6USBQ+Q117yTiROXPr0Im0E0 v/PpYjhIPjYTxtf0mX3NnK/h48j116kW32iceg4oqGgcGB/R/vJ5UcBiQUMR0z260c9d 7Gqw== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E3S+WMXnlQ9ye2DfoFgyqOhZ1np0yQK4rF2E/n5FeaxoZi3WhWC SsuaxumOgDtrVw7TwM1X7bwaYvokwC3pd3z1Sw1tKv7i X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKLcvwpHVI0wLwCQl/FbFTyR8sXXNO4vm5G2wMkxhkujUh7wPHQMUrRPzqtEbYCeF+DLuJ7rtKreWyWETerZob4= X-Received: by 2002:a02:a999:: with SMTP id q25-v6mr4492343jam.47.1529760745464; Sat, 23 Jun 2018 06:32:25 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 2002:a6b:4514:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Sat, 23 Jun 2018 06:32:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::234 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:226624 Archived-At: On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 9:30 PM, Alex Harsanyi wrote: > Increasing w32-pipe-buffer-size had no effect on the speed -- I know I said in > a previous email that it had an effect, but I only tried to increase it after > dropping w32-pipe-read-delay to 0 and tried it once -- sometimes the time > drops further from 0.13 to 0.8 seconds, but this seems random -- at this > speed, probably other factors, such as process startup, have an effect on the > read speed. Oops, above I meant to say 0.08, not 0.8, here some sequential runs with `w32-pipe-read-delay` set to 0 and `w32-pipe-buffer-size` set to 0: time-process: it took 0.08 seconds time-process: it took 0.14 seconds time-process: it took 0.09 seconds time-process: it took 0.14 seconds [2 times] time-process: it took 0.14 seconds time-process: it took 0.09 seconds time-process: it took 0.14 seconds time-process: it took 0.11 seconds time-process: it took 0.13 seconds time-process: it took 0.09 seconds time-process: it took 0.14 seconds time-process: it took 0.09 seconds