From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Fix for slow process output processing (please test). Date: 06 Jan 2004 00:44:13 +0100 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <87y8so7kjy.fsf@offby1.atm01.sea.blarg.net> <2914-Mon05Jan2004210950+0200-eliz@elta.co.il> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1073347640 728 80.91.224.253 (6 Jan 2004 00:07:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 00:07:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: offby1@blarg.net, Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org, "Kim F. Storm" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Tue Jan 06 01:07:16 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1Adeke-0001TY-00 for ; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 01:07:16 +0100 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1Adekd-0008OW-00 for ; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 01:07:16 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AdfUK-0004re-HS for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 19:54:28 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1AdfPa-00024g-3i for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 19:49:34 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1AdfOR-0001Ii-E1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 19:48:55 -0500 Original-Received: from [217.80.157.161] (helo=localhost.localdomain) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.24) id 1AdfMo-0000HK-U7; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 19:46:43 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.localdomain (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i05NiN88010615 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 6 Jan 2004 00:44:24 +0100 Original-Received: (from dak@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i05NiETD010606; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 00:44:14 +0100 Original-To: Jason Rumney In-Reply-To: Original-Lines: 29 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:19029 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:19029 Jason Rumney writes: > storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) writes: > > > With the code below (provided by David some time ago), I see a big > > difference on the Linux 2.4 kernel I'm using (Redhat 9.0). > > > > Maybe someone can try it (just do M-x make-test) with and without > > adaptive buffering enabled on windows. > > I have tried running the code, but I'm not sure I understand this > well enough to interpret the results. With adaptive buffering on, we > get more 1024 byte blocks, but we get nothing for Time: 0 (which may > be a symptom of the noticeable delay that was reported?), and we > also have a Time: 9, which I think might mean it is taking longer > overall. The numbers are all in at least the high hundreds for both > tests, so maybe Windows is doing some buffering behind the scenes > anyway. What kind of machine do you have? Single or double processor? Is the processor capable of hyperthreading? Anyway, it would appear that the effect of adaptive buffering would be rather negative (as witnessed by the initial large delay). We should certainly try to find out what causes this large delay because the cause might be impacting Emacs in other areas as well. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum