[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
RE: [cdt-dev] Firefox Fast Index Times
|
Only one of the forward declarations
of a function needs to have the static keyword in order for the function
to be static. Therefore, to correctly answer isStatic, all the forward
declarations may need to be checked.
To get around this performance hit,
there is an ICPPInternalFunction.isStatic(boolean) where you can specify
false to not find the rest of the declarations. Binding resolution
prefers to use this method instead if the binding implements it.
-Andrew
Doug Schaefer <DSchaefer@xxxxxxx>
Sent by: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
11/20/2006 03:45 PM
Please respond to
"CDT General developers list." <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
To
| "CDT General developers list."
<cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
cc
|
|
Subject
| RE: [cdt-dev] Firefox Fast Index Times |
|
isStatic is related since it
does a resolveAllDeclarations (for some reason) which does a whole bunch
of PDOM searches as well.
Doug Schaefer, QNX Software
Systems
Eclipse CDT Project Lead, Tools PMC Member
From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Doug Schaefer
Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 3:22 PM
To: CDT General developers list.
Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] Firefox Fast Index Times
After further analysis, bug
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=165213
has been raised on one of the main culprits of the performance degradation.
I also saw big numbers on CPPFunction.isStatic(),
and Markus saw them too, I’ll need to investigate more on that one.
Doug Schaefer, QNX Software
Systems
Eclipse CDT Project Lead, Tools PMC Member
From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Doug Schaefer
Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 1:49 PM
To: CDT General developers list.
Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] Firefox Fast Index Times
Unfortunately, no. J
I started using the TPTP profiler
to test out our old parser performance test we affectionally cursed, the
Trilogy. The Trilogy is a simple file that looks a lot like this:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <windows.h>
#include <iostream>
int main() { return 0; }
We used to run it with cygwin
with the mingw package installed (to get windows.h). I am now doing it
with the Windows Build integration.
With my first run, I am seeing
FindEquivalentBinding visitor taking 2/3’s of the time. This visitor is
new and searches the PDOM very often. I can see how, as the PDOM gets bigger,
this function takes a bit longer since the searches have a bigger B-Tree
to deal with (but theoretically, the incremental time should be minimal).
But this functionality is new in HEAD and should be a good place to start.
Cheers,
Doug Schaefer, QNX Software
Systems
Eclipse CDT Project Lead, Tools PMC Member
From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Sergey Prigogin
Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 1:16 PM
To: CDT General developers list.
Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] Firefox Fast Index Times
I guess the difference in indexing
time reflects the improvement in index coverage :-).
Indexing speed seems to be highly nonlinear. Towards the end of my 3K files
code base, parsing of some files took several minutes a piece instead of
a subsecond time in the beginning.
-sergey
On 11/17/06, Doug Schaefer
<DSchaefer@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
Hey gang,
We've now cleared up enough exceptions to
fully index Firefox 2.0 with the Fast indexer. Here are the numbers I got.
The initial index is the first one after launching Eclipse (includes binary
parser times, disk caching, etc.) and the reindex is from the Reindex menu
item (pretty much pure indexing time). These tests were done on my 512
MB, Athon 64 2800 (very average machine) running Ubuntu Linux.
CDT 3.1.1
Initial index – 12.3 minutes
Reindex – 10.3 minutes
HEAD
Initial Index – 122.2 minutes
Reindex – 119.6 minutes
My heart bleeds….
There are still a few exceptions that I'm
working on cleaning up, but I don't think they'll impact these times much.
I will continue to monitor these times and
give you regular reports.
Doug Schaefer, QNX Software Systems
Eclipse CDT Project Lead, Tools PMC Member
_______________________________________________
cdt-dev mailing list
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
_______________________________________________
cdt-dev mailing list
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev