Re: grep vs git grep performance?

[Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>]

On Thu, 2017-10-26 at 10:45 -0700, Stefan Beller wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 10:41 AM, Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2017-10-26 at 09:58 -0700, Stefan Beller wrote:
> > > + Avar who knows a thing about pcre (I assume the regex compilation
> > > has impact on grep speed)
> > > 
> > > On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 8:02 AM, Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> > > > Comparing a cache warm git grep vs command line grep
> > > > shows significant differences in cpu & wall clock.
> > > > 
> > > > Any ideas how to improve this?
> > > > 
> > > > $ time git grep "\bseq_.*%p\W" | wc -l
> > > > 112
> > > > 
> > > > real    0m4.271s
> > > > user    0m15.520s
> > > > sys     0m0.395s
> > > > 
> > > > $ time grep -r --include=*.[ch] "\bseq_.*%p\W" * | wc -l
> > > > 112
> > > > 
> > > > real    0m1.164s
> > > > user    0m0.847s
> > > > sys     0m0.314s
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > I wonder how much is algorithmic advantage vs coding/micro
> > > optimization that we can do.
> > 
> > As do I.  I presume this is libpcre related.
> > 
> > For instance, git grep performance is better than grep for:
> > 
> > $ time git grep -w "seq_printf" -- "*.[ch]" | wc -l
> > 8609
> > 
> > real    0m0.301s
> > user    0m0.548s
> > sys     0m0.372s
> > 
> > $ time grep -w -r --include=*.[ch] "seq_printf" * | wc -l
> > 8609
> > 
> > real    0m0.706s
> > user    0m0.396s
> > sys     0m0.309s
> > 
> 
> One important piece of information is what version of Git you are running,
> 
> 
> $ git tag --contains origin/ab/pcre-v2
> v2.14.0

v2.10

> ...
> 
> (and the version of pcre, see the numbers)
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/git/git.git/commit/?id=94da9193a6eb8f1085d611c04ff8bbb4f5ae1e0a

I definitely didn't have that one.

I recompiled git latest (with USE_LIBPCRE2) and reran.

Here are the results

$ git --version
git version 2.15.0.rc2.48.g4e40fb3

$ time git grep -P "\bseq_.*%p\W" -- "*.[ch]" | wc -l
112

real	0m0.437s
user	0m1.008s
sys	0m0.381s

So, git grep performance has already been
quite successfully improved.

Thanks.