From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: Make GIT_USE_LOOKUP default? Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 12:49:50 -0400 Message-ID: <20130318164950.GA14844@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <7vd2uxrdh7.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20130318073229.GA5551@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vtxo8ody3.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Ingo Molnar , Jonathan Nieder , Duy Nguyen , Git Mailing List To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Mar 18 17:50:23 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UHdGP-0007sw-Mx for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 18 Mar 2013 17:50:22 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752639Ab3CRQty (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Mar 2013 12:49:54 -0400 Received: from 75-15-5-89.uvs.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([75.15.5.89]:56249 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751676Ab3CRQty (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Mar 2013 12:49:54 -0400 Received: (qmail 19252 invoked by uid 107); 18 Mar 2013 16:51:36 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Mon, 18 Mar 2013 12:51:36 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 18 Mar 2013 12:49:50 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vtxo8ody3.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 09:44:20AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > FWIW, I am getting something like this on my > > $ grep 'model name' /proc/cpuinfo | uniq -c > 4 model name : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q9450 @ 2.66GHz > > The same "rev-list --objects --all >/dev/null", best of five: > > [current master, compiled with -O2] > real 0m39.956s > user 0m39.562s > sys 0m0.396s > > [revert 1a812f3 (i.e., go back to memcmp), -O2] > real 0m42.161s > user 0m41.879s > sys 0m0.284s > > It could be that the difference may be how well memcmp() is > optimized, no? My box runs Debian with libc6 2.11.3-4 and gcc > 4.4.5. Yeah, that would make sense. I have libc6 2.13-38 and gcc 4.7.2 (debian unstable). -Peff