From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-it0-f52.google.com (mail-it0-f52.google.com [209.85.214.52]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 438BA6FEF3 for ; Thu, 10 Nov 2016 19:39:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-it0-f52.google.com with SMTP id e187so282186981itc.0 for ; Thu, 10 Nov 2016 11:39:07 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=intel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references :organization:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Kl8Zinw/oeTNZ/Q4zOnS9gyPsNMr3EezJ6HT68l6vd8=; b=sUzxsTc6r8pgtHtdCQsqRs/3D0l7lwjY49HAIciXo/ES+DLmsvmREs3WbKUJctYAmM fPdhUfLi0GPJ5kpmoOzkZpEPXdXA3v5hP/VLBj8kTPnYV14TB1SR35Wn8AwM+w3+0BUl x+wGDe0PhV4Md3C/gFvILI0InmUGHzeoP8S6DP1S9akzMDqfxUj4+hV5jpqEIGY7T7I5 lOXG5wiFjiGJysDjMlI8ZIem/i93CXr03FowoGRs9zc84Ng97Gl4D3rnRL9tD0JrJ27Z RWJbRz/G5YA4UJdhfBIXNXpRgi9LPTUfDzqXcPnfdWFxy34qrjbUWBT0sYi1II4P+NYQ oggw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:organization:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Kl8Zinw/oeTNZ/Q4zOnS9gyPsNMr3EezJ6HT68l6vd8=; b=Wq2xlbQ+d+b1YYKSL3vNAmGB3wF2zqsbABBtw6D48Pixv3L7Twdzhe31ZSx7Qo0Lk8 XO77Z7Px005XBUCWrPHFWpeqT/2ae19yKwTemu3nCocJErxKqBZO2sFn3Z0Ns5vNwXk3 PoJHG0bXmmIMbgbAOnfgb8IgSI4l2Atgso7KNlWSUyLjjjxgvzB8vTYuunEkPJzFrpt/ zBRTwXe/FqAdAMDq7tJ9EYnlqIPcHXHUInfqgrz+r4rU7srO3/wR1xST7OVuXRGdhffE F8oEDUMz8BOCPg2P6ocTSWv7RUZ1h2QVyIv/Zrxi+8L14Qw8lx4fkekYwTG1/3KsxOuK UlNg== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvcwUfcoKnPQiJJWyT4F0jSKeU56Olemdh0C2vI9nSf6nCQ93RDd4FTsrGz/3YQdDBvf X-Received: by 10.36.233.66 with SMTP id f63mr14403653ith.55.1478806743851; Thu, 10 Nov 2016 11:39:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from pohly-mobl1 (p5DE8C632.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [93.232.198.50]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u19sm2520897iou.31.2016.11.10.11.39.01 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 10 Nov 2016 11:39:02 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <1478806739.3449.82.camel@intel.com> From: Patrick Ohly To: Jianxun Zhang Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 20:38:59 +0100 In-Reply-To: <1478800392.3449.79.camel@intel.com> References: <1476389794-109684-1-git-send-email-jianxun.zhang@linux.intel.com> <1478800392.3449.79.camel@intel.com> Organization: Intel GmbH, Dornacher Strasse 1, D-85622 Feldkirchen/Munich X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.9-1+b1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: Olev Kartau , openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] sqlite3: Revert ad601c7962 from 3.14.1 amalgamation package X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 19:39:06 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 2016-11-10 at 18:53 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote: > On Thu, 2016-10-13 at 13:16 -0700, Jianxun Zhang wrote: > > It turns out this change between 3.12.2 and 3.13 introduces > > a 2% increase of build time based on statistic data in > > bz10367. > > Let me add that this patch increased build performance in Ostro even > more: apparently one big impact of the sqlite performance issue is on > pseudo. Ostro depends fairly heavily on pseudo because of meta-swupd and > xattrs on all files. > > When this patch and others recently landed in Ostro, total build times > dropped from 4:46h (build #508, > https://ostroproject.org/jenkins/job/build_intel-corei7-64/2763/console) > to 2:07h (build #510, > https://ostroproject.org/jenkins/job/build_intel-corei7-64/2831/console). In case that someone wonders: in addition to that enhancement, we can still do even better by also reducing the work that meta-swupd causes. A build with my recent meta-swupd enhancements takes the build time down to 1:05h. -- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter.