Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 28 May 2007 23:32:52 +0200
From:      Hartmut Brandt <hartmut.brandt@dlr.de>
To:        Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org>
Cc:        ports@freebsd.org, Stephen Montgomery-Smith <stephen@math.missouri.edu>, hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Looking for speed increases in "make index" and pkg_version for ports
Message-ID:  <465B4A84.6050407@dlr.de>
In-Reply-To: <18011.6019.436391.128372@bhuda.mired.org>
References:  <4659EF80.70100@math.missouri.edu>	<465AB421.10802@dlr.de> <18011.6019.436391.128372@bhuda.mired.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mike Meyer wrote:
> In <465AB421.10802@dlr.de>, Hartmut Brandt <hartmut.brandt@dlr.de> typed:
>> 1. make and its sub-makes for a) reading the file; b) parsing the file
>> (note that .if and .for processing is done while parsing); c) processing
>> targets.
> 
> Make and submakes have been gone over already. See <URL:
> http://miller.emu.id.au/pmiller/books/rmch/ >.
> 
> I'm not sure it can be applied to the ports tree, though. I haven't
> looked into it, but recalled this paper when you mentioned measuring
> makes and sub-makes.

Unfortunately you deleted the sentence before, so I rephrase it: before 
looking into optimizations find out where the time is actually spend - 
how many seconds of the hours the process takes, are actually spent in 
make and sub-makes. If the entire process takes 2 hours of which the 
makes take 20 seconds then by enhancing performance of make by 50% you 
win 10 seconds. This is probably not worth a single line of additional code.

The paper you point to talks about something entirely different.

harti



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?465B4A84.6050407>