From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Daniel Berlin" Subject: Re: Something is broken in repack Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 12:28:25 -0500 Message-ID: <4aca3dc20712110928ybb84c16n40b6dbd50feddb06@mail.gmail.com> References: <9e4733910712071505y6834f040k37261d65a2d445c4@mail.gmail.com> <9e4733910712101825l33cdc2c0mca2ddbfd5afdb298@mail.gmail.com> <9e4733910712102125w56c70c0cxb8b00a060b62077@mail.gmail.com> <9e4733910712102129v140c2affqf2e73e75855b61ea@mail.gmail.com> <9e4733910712102301p5e6c4165v6afb32d157478828@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Nicolas Pitre" , "Junio C Hamano" , gcc@gcc.gnu.org, "Git Mailing List" To: "Jon Smirl" X-From: gcc-return-142915-gcc=m.gmane.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Dec 11 18:28:56 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcc@gmane.org Received: from sourceware.org ([209.132.176.174]) by lo.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1J28ub-0007vt-Jr for gcc@gmane.org; Tue, 11 Dec 2007 18:28:54 +0100 Received: (qmail 5560 invoked by alias); 11 Dec 2007 17:28:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 5550 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Dec 2007 17:28:33 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com (HELO wr-out-0506.google.com) (64.233.184.226) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 11 Dec 2007 17:28:29 +0000 Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id 60so1879592wri for ; Tue, 11 Dec 2007 09:28:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.191.2 with SMTP id o2mr3761281wff.1197394105207; Tue, 11 Dec 2007 09:28:25 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.217.1 with HTTP; Tue, 11 Dec 2007 09:28:25 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <9e4733910712102301p5e6c4165v6afb32d157478828@mail.gmail.com> Content-Disposition: inline X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Delivered-To: mailing list gcc@gcc.gnu.org Archived-At: On 12/11/07, Jon Smirl wrote: > > Total CPU time 196 CPU minutes vs 190 for gcc. Google's claims of > being faster are not true. Depends on your allocation patterns. For our apps, it certainly is :) Of course, i don't know if we've updated the external allocator in a while, i'll bug the people in charge of it.