From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LcLkN-0004ta-Lb for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 15:32:31 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B6194E0741; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 15:30:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-fx0-f175.google.com (mail-fx0-f175.google.com [209.85.220.175]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AB88E0741 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 15:30:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: by fxm23 with SMTP id 23so31786fxm.34 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 07:30:30 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:date:from:to:subject :message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer:mime-version :content-type; bh=+ChiIM28bIil08iq4WMRxQkB5oZTGbwHNzmu5dcrkBY=; b=mKmknI2+7SyG/BkZNu9PXZhHsNVi/VpzKyv/XZ51AvIOyLCN2O/giVtta+f5/AuJWB YdEdhN4X9TQM4HXGIEp331E9UtTB7IruIU5lFQOVgpnUqTywN86X66Ou1qCM59WxtxIJ SEmVhsovvD6l4YmCHv9I/RmHAcrgyIho5XrPs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer :mime-version:content-type; b=vyzxZgfDg4wn9tAEwLuVBZznNJsz3cmvV+5WAs8d1krNl0vlnNIXzmqhVH3aRI+Y// ydypPnGpJs4qLpV/3V7FvO8nGE5J35dlZkIaTAU0jBsECt3b+C8UCYAYLweN4q+Ngo47 gaIwkj68IM4pe382KWKp6MZEyzw5OwbLo9kV0= Received: by 10.223.109.199 with SMTP id k7mr1038814fap.45.1235575830616; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 07:30:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from snowcone (92-235-187-79.cable.ubr18.sgyl.blueyonder.co.uk [92.235.187.79]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 23sm2066926eya.16.2009.02.25.07.30.29 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 25 Feb 2009 07:30:30 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 15:30:23 +0000 From: Ciaran McCreesh To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Issues regarding glep-55 (Was: [gentoo-council] Re: Preliminary Meeting-Topics for 12 February 2009) Message-ID: <20090225153023.4540ad7c@snowcone> In-Reply-To: <20090225093344.1858b384@gentoo.org> References: <1234257125.18160.2016.camel@localhost> <1234450419.20950.2.camel@localhost> <20090212160045.GB3642@comet> <20090212161644.GD3642@comet> <20090212162103.256b003f@snowcone> <20090212171055.GA3652@comet> <20090212172109.778fb268@snowcone> <20090212173743.GD3652@comet> <20090212180350.0d9a9df5@snowcone> <1235037961.13198.779.camel@localhost> <20090219125124.33eaa66c@snowcone> <1235077892.13198.1923.camel@localhost> <20090222171658.278ae167@halo.dirtyepic.sk.ca> <49A1E1CB.1000806@gentoo.org> <20090222234800.29d64b8d@snowcone> <49A206A7.3050604@gentoo.org> <49A39CE7.4010201@gentoo.org> <20090224141912.0a666a17@snowcone> <49A41A8C.1060002@gentoo.org> <20090224161449.07bc580a@snowcone> <49A42B86.9010903@gentoo.org> <20090224182416.3db4f60f@snowcone> <20090224202843.6c8b89e7@gentoo.org> <20090224193711.2d99ca4f@snowcone> <20090225093344.1858b384@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.14.7; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_//ILmcudbhkxXjzRgiqi+xH/"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Archives-Salt: ef30ab30-bc19-4a34-a7aa-704126f15864 X-Archives-Hash: 51f410a60de0893cc3531fa824013219 --Sig_//ILmcudbhkxXjzRgiqi+xH/ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 25 Feb 2009 09:33:44 +0100 Alexis Ballier wrote: > That sounds like an implementation detail that you could solve by > using something else than a flat file database for metadata if > open()/read() calls are the slow part. Metadata's shipped with the tree. It's a PMS detail. If we didn't care about package manager performance, we wouldn't be shipping metadata with the tree at all... > > > I would be very surprised if that "2 times" factor happens to be > > > true, because finding a string in a file is an order of magnitude > > > simpler than sourcing said file with bash. Moreover this doesn't > > > take into account disk and os cache. > >=20 > > No no no. *Opening* the file is the slow part, not searching. The > > file wouldn't otherwise be opened at all. >=20 > Thus the only drawback is when you open a file, see there that you > can't handle the eapi, then close it and open an older one. Uh. No. The drawback is that you're opening around ten thousand files that would otherwise not be opened. That's a huge cost. --=20 Ciaran McCreesh --Sig_//ILmcudbhkxXjzRgiqi+xH/ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkmlZBIACgkQ96zL6DUtXhEgIwCdFNJKZAwZW9zAaOvosYhGsPNU rQ8AoKVZyNnOTP5we4I2Ia5LVeJbHCsh =Kxa4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_//ILmcudbhkxXjzRgiqi+xH/--