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>