From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12027 invoked by alias); 24 Oct 2015 07:38:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Workers List List-Post: List-Help: X-Seq: 36931 Received: (qmail 17407 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2015 07:38:03 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM, T_DKIM_INVALID autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=zgZSIWNsOFKP/4k3GgHarAlcuxi1R69fiidD+r2LH+E=; b=ZHEM0FTepakvRpmus0YgopJsGzuSNCvyhPr5RJGbFiIjHNTO+tcfvxqXu3SyKijVWe n+B+arAut+j/Niru/GtObNjl+ni6fIrv+Rs7vp6xYxICvib6oWxz8zw6kMUiwdVnippb 5xW8PWQ6d0CoxEmEdfB+IYHsmrJIf333miR4w1zbs8nfvYfiLbHEv+pUi1Ag/EbQodSc Eo8lsfzBQYr8qSiIyfjcbjdIv8ngUShxcb7y3Tjju6jrSx9Ygf4WtKR57xu/3n82vmMo kg7/o6EZXTrBmQ2+CQYaZhiVEhefutZoD1Y3wlkCUiDNgSXo8IlShNuf/xSkcigmrIn7 FaIQ== X-Received: by 10.25.15.163 with SMTP id 35mr8266096lfp.98.1445672280376; Sat, 24 Oct 2015 00:38:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <151010105849.ZM10144@torch.brasslantern.com> <151010170623.ZM16166@torch.brasslantern.com> <151010232045.ZM12931@torch.brasslantern.com> <151011091757.ZM27755@torch.brasslantern.com> <151011103121.ZM8814@torch.brasslantern.com> <151011142204.ZM9103@torch.brasslantern.com> <151012070105.ZM15099@torch.brasslantern.com> <151012173304.ZM15477@torch.brasslantern.com> <151013085246.ZM30504@torch.brasslantern.com> <20151014142722.282d0c5a@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri> <151014092536.ZM32511@torch.brasslantern.com> <151014095009.ZM19954@torch.brasslantern.com> <151014213224.ZM15646@torch.brasslantern.com> <151015173554.ZM30733@torch.brasslantern.com> <151019102117.ZM32700@torch.brasslantern.com> <151022080024.ZM6471@torch.brasslantern.com> <151023122655.ZM21177@torch.brasslantern.com> <151023165006.ZM25785@torch.brasslantern.com> From: Sebastian Gniazdowski Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2015 09:37:40 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Slowdown around 5.0.5-dev-0 To: zsh-workers@zsh.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 24 October 2015 at 08:09, Sebastian Gniazdowski wrote: > On 24 October 2015 at 01:50, Bart Schaefer wr= ote: >> On Oct 23, 12:26pm, Bart Schaefer wrote: >> } >> } Try the below patch against 8e9a68ad1 ? >> >> However, if the results can be considered reliable anyway, note that >> 36926 retains most of the search_test speed, which I think is an >> improvement over backing out all of 36834 (Sebastian's results for >> zsh-newheaps-zhalloc, if I'm reading his email correctly). > > I ran quick tests yesterday and obtained this too. Good news that not > all gains of 36834 will be withdrawn! :) The newheaps-zhalloc is what > you write, two following patches without 36834. I misread this. What I wanted to state, is that your patch from yesterday retained search_test speed. The fact that 36836 has its contribution in speeding up search_test is was described by me in previous email: > newheaps is responsible for > instant-responsivity of my script, 36836 for much faster searching =E2=80= =93 > that's a good compromise So the thing is that your patch from yesterday retains search_test speed up of 36834, while fixing the memory issues of 36834. Together with 36836, this gives full retain of search_test speedup, nothing is lost, speed of pattern matching is as high as with no revert from current head state. What's lost is string_test speedup 36834 gave, however, it did so with cost of increased memory usage Best regards, Sebastian Gniazdowski