| 1 |
On 5/24/20 9:40 AM, Daniel Buschke wrote: |
| 2 |
> Am 24.05.2020 um 14:10 schrieb Daniel Pielmeier: |
| 3 |
>> Here the bash version takes around 2.9 seconds while the python version |
| 4 |
>> takes 3.2 seconds. Excluding the portage API it takes 2.8 seconds and |
| 5 |
>> also excluding the data query it takes 0.3 seconds. So in the python |
| 6 |
>> version the data query takes 2.5 seconds (probably this is similar for |
| 7 |
>> the bash version) while all the rest takes 0.7 seconds |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> My initial tests showed that the bash version is a lot quicker than the |
| 10 |
>> python version. Somehow I can not reproduce this any more. As mentioned |
| 11 |
>> previously the data query is the most time consuming part in both the |
| 12 |
>> bash and the python version. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Oh dear! I readded the database index for file names. Now the data query |
| 15 |
> takes ~0.3 seconds *insert self slapping image here* |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> Anyway, for some strange reason I cannot reproduce the slothy behaviour |
| 18 |
> of portage, too. I'm 100% sure the bash version took 1 second while the |
| 19 |
> python version took 3 seconds. Strange. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> @Zac: Did you add some performance optimizations in the last 30 days? |
| 22 |
> Maybe Caching? No? Then you fixed this by pure imagination :) |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
No portage changes, but it looks like whatever "big difference" you've |
| 25 |
observed was probably related to the slowest step which is the remote |
| 26 |
data query. |
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Thanks, |
| 29 |
Zac |
Archives