Re: 2.5 atyfb on Sparc question

["Petr Vandrovec" <VANDROVE@vc.cvut.cz>]

On  8 Aug 02 at 11:32, James Simmons wrote:
> > On  8 Aug 02 at 11:16, James Simmons wrote:
> > > > I also hope that performance problems will be solved
> > > > before we are
> > > > forced to not use putcs.
> > >
> > > It will be :-) I need to one align the data. Second I
> > > plan to implement the patch recently posted here.
> >
> > Patch still showed about 100% slowdown against 2.4.x, if I interpreted
> > yesterday's table correctly. It is better than 1000% slowdown, but still...
> 
> I could believe a slow down of 2x but 1000 I don't think so.

Message from Antonio Daplas
(http://www.geocrawler.com/lists/3/SourceForge/9276/0/9249087/)
says:
2.5 old (with offscreen buffers) 10.708
2.5 new                           4.378
2.4                               2.098

His first message 
(http://www.geocrawler.com/lists/3/SourceForge/9276/25/9237029/)
listed 13.586 for old 2.5 code.

So you are right, old code was not 1000% slowdown, only 500%. But main
problem is not speed of old code, but speed of new code. And if numbers
are right, new code is still 100% slower than 2.4.x code was.
                                                Petr Vandrovec
                                                


-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf