unofficial mirror of bug-guile@gnu.org 
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com>
To: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
Cc: 19540-done@debbugs.gnu.org, Matt Wette <mwette@alumni.caltech.edu>
Subject: bug#19540: repeated ./././ in compiled modules
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 10:49:12 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87fus3geev.fsf@pobox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87twgj9eiu.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic Courtès"'s message of "Fri, 24 Jun 2016 10:28:41 +0200")

Hi :)

On Fri 24 Jun 2016 10:28, ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:

> Hello!
>
> Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com> skribis:
>
>> On Thu 23 Jun 2016 15:06, ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>>
>>> ‘canonicalize_file_name’ is costly: roughly one syscall per file name
>>> component.
>>>
>>> IIUC, ‘canonicalize_file_name’ is now called once for each ‘%load-path’
>>> entry and file name that we canonicalize.  Is this correct?
>>
>> That's correct, but only for relative canonicalization, which is in
>> practive only when loading Scheme files from source.  Seems out of the
>> hot path; what do you think?
>
> I think it’s likely to have a noticeable impact on startup time for
> projects with a large number of modules like Guix.

Aren't they usually compiled?  Loading compiled files will not
go through this path AFAIU.

> For instance, commands like ‘guix package -A’ or ‘guix build foo’ load
> all the modules.  The impact will be smaller on a laptop with an SSD
> than on an NFS mount, where it’s likely going to be terrrible (this
> could be tested using the ‘delay’ device mapper.)

Oh I'm with you that we need to be careful here.  I am under the
impression though that there's no additional impact here because this is
just something that happens at compile-time.  Or if you load a source
file, but in that case you're evaluating and expecting a perf loss is
not the end of the world.

Andy





  reply	other threads:[~2016-06-24  8:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-01-09  4:13 bug#19540: minor: module path picking up ./././ Matt Wette
2015-01-10 22:45 ` bug#19540: repeated ./././ in compiled modules Matt Wette
2015-01-19 20:28   ` Ludovic Courtès
2015-01-19 22:19     ` Matt Wette
2015-01-20 21:12       ` Ludovic Courtès
2016-06-23  8:36         ` Andy Wingo
2016-06-23 13:06           ` Ludovic Courtès
2016-06-23 16:03             ` Andy Wingo
2016-06-24  8:28               ` Ludovic Courtès
2016-06-24  8:49                 ` Andy Wingo [this message]
2016-06-24  9:41                   ` Ludovic Courtès
2015-01-18 16:09 ` bug#19540: also generates problem for debugger tracebacks Matt Wette

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87fus3geev.fsf@pobox.com \
    --to=wingo@pobox.com \
    --cc=19540-done@debbugs.gnu.org \
    --cc=ludo@gnu.org \
    --cc=mwette@alumni.caltech.edu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).